Bhadrachalam Bar Association opposes abolition of mobile courts in agency areas
The Bhadrachalam Bar Association urged the Telangana government to withdraw its order abolishing mobile courts in agency areas, warning that transferring judicial powers to RDOs and Sub-Collectors could delay justice delivery and cause hardship to tribal communities and poor litigants
Kothagudem: The Bhadrachalam Bar Association has demanded that the Telangana government withdraw its order transferring the powers conferred on sub-divisional magistrates of mobile courts to revenue divisional officers (RDOs) in the State.
It may be recalled that in 1990, the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh government, through GO Ms No. 406, constituted mobile courts in nine districts to provide speedy justice to people living in remote villages and agency areas.
In GO Rt. No. 70, dated January 6, 2026, the government transferred the powers vested in sub-divisional magistrates to the concerned sub-divisional officers (RDOs) in 14 revenue divisions to exercise civil and criminal judicial administration.
The order covered Bhadrachalam, Kothagudem, Kallur, Mahabubabad, Mulugu, Narsampet, Adilabad, Utnoor, Asifabad, Kagaznagar, Mancherial, Bellampally and Achampet revenue divisions in Scheduled Areas.
Speaking to Telangana Today, senior advocate Kota Devadanam stated that the government’s decision would affect litigants in areas under the jurisdiction of the mobile courts and could lead to unnecessary delays in the administration of justice.
According to him, more than 6,000 cases are pending in the Bhadrachalam mobile court alone. The court has territorial jurisdiction over Scheduled Areas covering 28 mandals of the erstwhile Khammam and Mulugu districts, as well as Garla mandal in Mahabubabad district.
As RDOs and Sub-Collectors are already burdened with revenue and land administration, besides several other responsibilities, they may not be able to focus adequately on judicial administration, thereby increasing the pendency of cases, Devadanam noted.
Bar Association president Kodali Srinivasan stated that it was unfortunate that while the legal fraternity in agency areas was seeking to strengthen the mobile courts, the government had decided to abolish them and reassign those responsibilities to RDOs and Sub-Collectors.
He said the move would result in severe hardship for tribal communities and the poor. The government, he added, had taken the decision without fully considering the High Court verdicts and legal principles that formed the basis for establishing the mobile courts.
The government should review GO Rt. No. 70 to ensure continued access to judicial services for people in agency areas. Similarly, the pecuniary jurisdiction of mobile courts should be enhanced on par with the Rs 20 lakh pecuniary jurisdiction of junior civil judge courts, Srinivasan added.
