Two months since it was instituted, the perception that the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency or HYDRAA has disproportionately affected the disadvantaged sections of society has grown. The Revanth Reddy-led Telangana government’s lack of information on what the exact science is behind the operations has added to the confusion and the feeling of mistrust against it.
Recently, A.V. Ranganath, the chief of HYDRAA, made a startling remark by saying that he would not give residents whose houses are going to be demolished time to approach courts as it would impede his work, as it would allow them to secure stay orders.
This statement reveals a clear intent by the state government to bypass citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed right to appeal to the courts, while allowing itself to ride roughshod over the established due process of the law of the land. It signals a troubling shift toward authoritarianism, where judicial process and fundamental rights are given a go-by in favour of expedient and unilateral actions.
HYDRAA has been demolishing structures that have come up on lake beds and buffer zones in and around Hyderabad. Chief minister Revanth Reddy, who is investing huge political capital into the initiative, says that it is to clear encroachments on the lake beds, which have, over the years, caused floods in Hyderabad.
However, there is scathing criticism of these demolitions from both the public and opposition political parties, who allege that houses are being razed without any legal notices, and that only properties belonging to commoners are being targeted. Videos of people whose properties were demolished, wailing and falling at the feet of authorities, are going viral on social media.
Do the ends justify the means? Should we treat HYDRAA’s demolitions as a case of collateral damage as an inevitability due to the eventual, larger common good? Should bypassing existing legal processes and procedures be acceptable if ‘public opinion’ is in favour of these demolitions? These are some of the many unanswered questions that this piece tries to delve into.
Undermining the principles of justice
HYDRAA came into being through a government order (GO) issued by the Telangana government’s municipal administration and urban development department. It covers what is called the Telangana Core Urban Region, spanning across the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation region and the adjoining districts of Ranga Reddy, Medchal-Malkajgiri and Sangareddy districts up to the Outer Ring Road.
According to the GO, the agency was created to prevent urban disasters and protect public assets, such as lakes.
Whatever may have been its stated objectives, demolitions carried out by HYDRAA resemble that of a police force acting without any adherence to the rule of law. HYDRAA’s controversial actions, targeting the commercial properties of the well-off and, reportedly, the homes of the marginalised, raise significant concerns about the unequal treatment of citizens.
While it has been reported that some people, including the chief minister’s brother and a construction baron, received advance notice of a month or 15 days to remove alleged encroachments, others, including the poor, are alleged to have had their homes demolished without adequate notice.
The latter set of house owners, who spend their life’s earnings on building shelters for themselves, are possibly being rendered homeless in violation of the right to life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution.
Treating both the affluent and their commercial properties the same as the houses of poor and middle-class families would certainly make legal sense, but would also ignore the disproportionate impact it leaves on the latter set of citizens.
The right to property – while it is not a fundamental right under the constitution – is a legal right under Article 300A, and demolitions without notice infringe upon this right.
The courts, as in the Sudama Singh vs Government of Delhi case, have emphasised the need to carry out comprehensive surveys and have rehabilitation plans in place before evictions, thereby recognising the right to shelter as an essential part of the right to life under Article 21.
However, in the case of HYDRAA demolitions, the perception lingers that the idea of the proportionate application of the law is being undermined, as the impact on the marginalised communities is far greater than just the loss of property – it threatens their very survival.
In a parliamentary democracy like India, the legislature holds supremacy in the lawmaking process. In Telangana, the Telangana Land Encroachment Act of 1905, which addresses the issue of the unauthorised occupation of government lands, incorporates principles of fairness, such as the right to be heard.
That the establishment of HYDRAA is based on a GO and not through a legislative enactment shows that the authority of the state legislature has been compromised.
Modern justice systems are built on the foundation of rights such as representation, the right to appeal and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. By resorting to abrupt and unilateral demolitions without following due legal process, HYDRAA would strip citizens of these basic protections and leave them defenceless if their homes are destroyed by the brute force of state power.
Such instances would also point to chief minister Reddy’s complete disregard for the rules and precedents established under the law. Without legislative sanction and the unbridled power it is vested with, HYDRAA is reflective of India’s shift from thick constitutionalism (which encompasses all constitutional values) into a thin constitution (which diminishes judicial independence).
This form of governance, driven by narratives crafted under the image of a single leader bypassing institutions established by constitution, is a degradation of democracy to populist tendencies.
Populist leaders, who are often anti-elitist and anti-pluralist in nature, claim to represent the exclusive will of ‘the people’.
HYDRAA, which runs on the grand image of chief minister Reddy and its actions such as the demolition of actor Nagarjuna’s ‘N Convention Centre’ (also allegedly without notice), demonstrate how leaders exploit public sentiment against social elites to fulfil their ambitions.
Invoking such sentiments against elites from a section of the masses to get legitimacy for policies such as HYDRAA, through populism, could result in the displacement of the marginalised, whose voices will remain unheard if their houses are demolished and the principles of justice are sidestepped.
This approach of ‘instant justice’ through populism not only dehumanises the individuals affected but also drags society into a more regressive and authoritarian state, undermining democratic values and pushing the political system back to arbitrariness and oppression.
The establishment of HYDRAA has raised numerous unanswered questions about its policy framework and operational mechanisms. There is no clear outline regarding how it functions and it does not have a clear policy framework. Reports of individuals receiving different amounts of notice prior to demolition have added to the perception of it being inconsistent in its enforcement.
Despite weeks passing since HYDRAA’s inception, there remains ambiguity around key definitions: what qualifies as a lake, what constitutes encroachment and the reference period used to assess these issues. When a policy can affect marginalised lives, it requires a legislative resolution with broad discussions.
Instant justice, which may be satisfying, does not translate well into governance, particularly in a major city like Hyderabad. This approach is certainly not a panacea for disaster management and ecological problems, as laid out in the preparatory government order establishing HYDRAA. By all calculations – economic, moral and constitutional – it remains an anti-people measure.
Pottepaka Sandeep Kumar is a research associate with the Indian Council of Social Science Research and political commentator based in Hyderabad. He tweets @Sandeepottepaka.and can be reached at pottepakasandeep@gmail.com. Bodapunti Vinith Kumar is an alumnus of NALSAR, Hyderabad. He can be reached at kvinith698@gmail.com.