A Deputy Collector from Andhra Pradesh faced flak from the Supreme Court for defying the High Court’s orders to hold back from disturbing slum dwellers’ possessions. A livid Justice BR Gavai warned unequivocally that, “We will take him into custody right now’’ for forcibly evicting slum-dwellers in Guntur district, resulting in their displacement.

Previously, the High Court found the Deputy Collector who was serving as tahsildar at the time, guilty of contempt and had sentenced him to two months’ simple imprisonment. Challenging that verdict, he approached the Supreme Court.

A bench of Justice B R Gavai and Justice AG Masih heard the matter and stated: “In ordinary circumstances, we would not have entertained the present Special Leave petition (SLP) in as much as the petitioner had the audacity to disobey the directions of the High Court dated 11.12.2013. However, taking a lenient view, we are inclined to issue notice, returnable on… till then, [there shall be] stay of the order.”

During the proceedings, the bench orally observed that the petitioner may have to serve jail time, compensate the displaced individuals, and face demotion.

At the start of the hearing, Justice Gavai voiced strong disapproval of the Tahsildar’s actions, remarking that government officers must not act as if they are beyond the reach of law. Addressing Senior Counsel Devashish Bharuka, who appeared for the petitioner, Justice Gavai said:

“We will take him into custody right now! Somebody's playing with the dignity of the High Court. How do you justify his conduct?”

In response, Bharuka admitted that the petitioner’s actions were indefensible but pleaded for clemency, requesting the Court to adopt a lenient stance. Justice Gavai asked:

“Mercy on what ground? Does he feel he is above the High Court?”

Justice Gavai also questioned the Tahsildar, who was present in court, about his failure to follow the High Court's specific direction not to disturb the slum-dwellers’ possession.

Bharuka attempted again to explain that the incident occurred during a period of instability in the region due to the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. He claimed that the evicted structures were illegal encroachments erected overnight and reiterated that the petitioner recognized his mistake. He also mentioned that the petitioner had two minor children.

To this, Justice Gavai responded:

“He should have thought about them when he dis-housed so many slum-dwellers. Those persons also had children…”

Justice Gavai further inquired about the petitioner’s current role. Bharuka informed the Court that he now serves as a Deputy Collector and is on deputation as Director (Protocol) with the state government.

Facts

In Guntur district, four individuals claiming to occupy certain land requested house site pattas from the revenue authorities. When their eviction seemed imminent, they approached the High Court, which on 13.09.2013 directed the Tahsildar to consider their applications within two months and ordered that their possession not be disturbed in the meantime.

Another group also claimed possession of nearby lands for over two years and sought similar protection. On 11.12.2013, the High Court warned the Tahsildar not to take the law into his own hands and barred him from demolishing structures until the occupants’ claims were assessed.

Despite these rulings, the slum-dwellers alleged that the Tahsildar demolished their huts on 06.12.2013 and 08.01.2014, prompting them to file contempt petitions.

The High Court found that the Tahsildar had deployed 88 police officers for the eviction on 08.01.2014 and acted in blatant disregard of its orders. It sentenced him to two months’ simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000.

The Tahsildar appealed, arguing that he removed only newly erected encroachments. However, the Division Bench found this defense lacking in detail and credibility, leading to the dismissal of his appeal. He then filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court.

Case Title: Tata Mohan Rao vs. S. Venkateswarlu and Ors., SLP(C) No. 10056-10057/2025