TGHRC Urges Swift Payment of Bhu Bharati Operators’ Pending Salaries; Seeks Enquiry into Alleged Custodial Assault
(By Syed Ali Taher Abedi)
Hyderabad, November 10, 2026-The Telangana Human Rights Commission (TGHRC), headed by its Chairperson, Hon’ble Dr. Justice Shameem Akther, has issued significant recommendations in two separate human rights proceedings, addressing the prolonged non-payment of salaries to Bhubharati Operators working under the Telangana Revenue Department and allegations of illegal detention and physical assault by police personnel in Hyderabad.
In the first matter, registered as SR No. 4588/2026, the Commission took cognizance of a complaint filed by P. Lingam, a resident of Kondapur in Kamareddy District, highlighting the non-payment of salaries to Bhubharati Operators for the past seven months.
The complainant brought to the Commission’s attention the financial hardship allegedly being faced by these operators, who are engaged in discharging their official responsibilities under the Telangana Revenue Department across various Mandals in the State.
Examining the grievance from the standpoint of constitutional guarantees and the right to livelihood, the Commission observed that prolonged withholding of salaries adversely affects the livelihood and financial security of employees and cannot be viewed as a mere administrative lapse.
It underscored that the denial of remuneration for an extended period strikes at the very foundation of an individual’s right to live with dignity, which is an integral facet of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, through its order dated 06.11.2026, the Commission recommended that the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Telangana, take necessary and effective measures to ensure that no salary remains outstanding to Bhubharati Operators working in various Mandals across the State.
The recommendation places responsibility upon the concerned administrative authority to address the prolonged salary arrears and safeguard the livelihood interests of the affected personnel.
In another significant matter concerning alleged police excesses, the Commission expressed serious concern over allegations of illegal detention and physical assault levelled against a police officer attached to Golconda Police Station, Hyderabad.
The proceedings, registered as HRC No. 7394 of 2025, arose out of a complaint filed by Shaik Sajid Ahmed, a resident of Golconda, Hyderabad, who alleged that he was illegally detained and physically assaulted by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Golconda Police Station, on 31.10.2025.
While examining the complaint, the Commission took note of the medical records placed before it, which reportedly confirmed injuries sustained by the complainant.
It further observed that the explanations furnished by the police officials concerned did not satisfactorily address the allegations raised against them.
Of particular significance, the Commission observed that the criminal case registered against the complainant appeared to be a counterblast to the allegations of police misconduct made by him.
The observation assumes importance in the context of constitutional safeguards against arbitrary police action and the obligation of law-enforcement authorities to exercise their powers strictly within the parameters prescribed by law.
Taking into consideration the material available on record and the explanations submitted by the concerned police authorities, the Commission, vide its order dated 30.10.2026, recommended that the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, order a detailed enquiry into the allegations in accordance with law and submit an Action Taken Report (ATR) within six months.
The recommendation underscores the importance of institutional accountability within the police establishment and reinforces the principle that allegations of custodial abuse, unlawful detention and physical assault by public officials warrant an impartial examination, particularly where medical evidence is brought on record.
Both recommendations have been made in exercise of the Commission’s powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which empowers the Human Rights Commission to recommend appropriate remedial measures upon completion of an inquiry into human rights violations or negligence in their prevention by public servants.
The two proceedings, though concerning distinct grievances, bring into focus the broader constitutional obligation of public authorities to uphold human dignity, ensure administrative accountability and protect citizens and public employees against violations of their legally recognised rights.
While one recommendation addresses the economic and livelihood rights of government-linked personnel under Article 21, the other seeks an institutional enquiry into allegations of police excesses and possible misuse of official authority.
The Telangana Human Rights Commission closed both proceedings with the aforesaid recommendations, leaving the respective government authorities responsible for taking appropriate action in accordance with law.