Senior Bureaucrat Accused of Criminal Conspiracy and Illegal Rent Collection on Public Land
Hyderabad, June 20, 2025: The Telangana High Court has issued notices to senior IAS officer Naveen Mittal and several others in connection with serious allegations involving forgery, criminal conspiracy, and illegal alienation of government land in the Guddimalkapur evacuee property case.
The disputed land falls under Survey No. 284/6 in Guddimalkapur village, Nanalnagar, Hyderabad, and is classified as Evacuee Property as per GO No. 388 dated December 20, 1954.
Writ Petition Alleges Fraudulent NOC and Land Record Tampering
The court’s action follows a writ petition filed by Shanti Agarwal, who alleged that Mittal—while holding a key administrative post—conspired with public officials and private individuals to manipulate land records. She claims that Mittal fraudulently issued a No Objection Certificate (NOC) categorizing the land as ‘Non-Evacuee’, enabling illegal occupation and commercial exploitation of the property without her knowledge or consent.
Agarwal first filed a criminal complaint before the XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad, which led to cognizance being taken against multiple accused (A2–A4, A9–A23, A40–A42). However, action against A1 – Naveen Mittal and others (A5, A7) was deferred, pending mandatory prosecution sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC.
Delay in Sanction Sparks Legal Challenge
Agarwal stated that she requested prosecution sanction from the Telangana Chief Secretary on April 26, 2024, but no decision was taken within the three-month window prescribed by the Supreme Court in the Vineet Narain v. Union of India ruling. Citing this inaction, she moved the High Court with a writ petition.
Justice K Lakshman, hearing the matter, issued notices to Mittal and the other accused, and clubbed the petition with related writ appeals previously filed by the respondents.
Prosecution Sanction Not Required for Personal Gains, Argues Petitioner
In a related criminal petition, Agarwal contended that no prior sanction is required to prosecute Mittal, as the alleged actions—including illegal rent collection and personal profiteering from public land—were not performed as part of his official duties.
She further alleged that Mittal, along with co-accused Hussain Bee (A2) and Atkher Hussain (A3), was personally collecting rent from the disputed evacuee property, which legally belongs to the government.
Justice N Tukaramji, taking cognizance of the petition, also issued notices to Mittal and the co-accused, instructing them to submit formal responses to the allegations.
Broader Implications for Governance and Accountability
The case has raised serious legal and ethical concerns surrounding the abuse of official authority, potential personal enrichment, and the possible existence of a systemic nexus facilitating illegal land deals.
Legal experts warn that if the allegations are substantiated, the consequences could include criminal prosecution, departmental disciplinary action, civil recovery of the land, and even disqualification from public office.
These developments could set a significant precedent in efforts to ensure greater transparency, accountability, and integrity in public administration across Telangana.
