The creation of the Hyderabad Disaster Relief and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) was ostensibly driven by a noble cause—to safeguard the 1,500 lakes and water bodies in Telangana, primarily in Greater Hyderabad. This mission, on the surface, seems vital and commendable, especially given the alarming 61% reduction in water bodies over the past 45 years. However, beneath this veneer of public good lies a growing concern: Is HYDRAA a genuine protector of the environment, or is it wielded as a political weapon? The establishment of HYDRAA, part of the Telangana Core Urban Region (TCUR) initiative, has indeed sent shockwaves through the state. Builders, realtors, and even politicians are reportedly losing sleep over the agency’s relentless demolition drive targeting unauthorized constructions. Over 50 illegal structures have been razed to the ground, and the fear of further demolitions has cast a long shadow over the city’s powerful elite. However, the timing and selective targeting of HYDRAA’s actions raise pertinent questions. While the agency’s mandate is clear—crack down on encroachments in Full Tank Levels (FTLs) and buffer zones—its execution appears to have a political undertone. Critics, particularly from the opposition, have accused the agency of using its mandate to harass and weaken political adversaries of the ruling Congress government. The most notable example is the high-profile legal battle involving Tollywood actor Nagarjuna, whose convention center became the focus of HYDRAA’s demolition efforts. Despite obtaining a stay order from the court, the incident has fuelled suspicions about the agency’s real intentions.
HYDRAA’s creation was championed by Chief Minister Revanth Reddy, who has positioned it as a cornerstone of his administration’s environmental and urban management strategy. The agency’s actions, however, suggest that it may be more than just an environmental watchdog. While it has rightly targeted illegal encroachments, there is a growing belief that HYDRAA is also a tool for political vendetta. The swift demolitions, executed without prior notice, have not only unnerved encroachers but have also sparked debates about the fairness and transparency of the agency’s operations. The opposition, led by the Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS), has been vocal in its criticism. BRS spokesperson Krishank Manne has pointed out several properties owned by Congress leaders that have allegedly been overlooked by HYDRAA. This selective action raises serious concerns about the agency’s impartiality. If HYDRAA is truly committed to restoring Hyderabad’s natural resources, why is it seemingly turning a blind eye to the encroachments by those within the ruling party? The judiciary’s role in this saga cannot be ignored. When petitioners challenged HYDRAA’s formation, the state high court refrained from issuing a stay, effectively greenlighting the agency’s operations. This decision, while legally sound, has done little to dispel the cloud of suspicion hanging over HYDRAA’s actions. If anything, it has intensified the scrutiny on the agency’s motives.
The phased approach adopted by HYDRAA—starting with halting further encroachments, followed by demolitions, and culminating in the revival and beautification of lakes—might appear systematic and thorough. Yet, the lack of transparency in its operations and the absence of checks against potential misuse of power raise red flags. The agency’s budget of Rs 200 crore and plans to establish a dedicated police station further amplify concerns about its growing influence and potential overreach. Public sentiment towards HYDRAA is mixed. While there is widespread appreciation for the state government’s efforts to protect and restore lakes, there is also an undercurrent of skepticism. Many fear that HYDRAA’s true purpose is not just environmental protection but also political retribution. The agency’s focus on high-profile targets, combined with its apparent disregard for encroachments by those aligned with the ruling party, has fuelled these suspicions. Thus far, HYDRAA’s mission to protect Telangana’s water bodies is undoubtedly important. However, its actions suggest that it may be serving dual purposes—environmental conservation on one hand and political maneuvering on the other. As the agency continues its operations, it must strive for greater transparency and impartiality to dispel the growing perception that it is being used as a political tool. Only then can HYDRAA truly fulfil its mandate without becoming a nightmare for the wrong reasons.
