From the courts: Report sought on kid’s case

 

Hyderabad: Justice Ramesh Ranganathan of the AP High Court has directed the principal secretary to the home department to submit a report within a week explaining why action was not taken against an inspector and a constable who assaulted a juvenile in public.

 

The judge was dealing with a plea by the Balala Hakkula Sangham challenging the inaction of the police in taking action against inspector Deva Reddy of Karimnagar for beating a juvenile in public in Jagityla town.

 

The judge found fault with the authorities for not taking action against the police personnel, and said that the postponement of increment of the inspector for one year without effect on future increments and pension goes against Rule 6(12) of the Andhra Pradesh Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Rules, 2003.

 

 

Justice L. Narasimha Reddy of the AP High Court ordered the presence of principal secretary to home department before the court on Friday in a contempt case to explain the reasons for not implementing the orders of the court. The judge was dealing with a contempt case by M/s. O.S.S. Laboratories Pvt Ltd, seeking action against the authorities under the Contempt of Courts Act for not implementing the orders.

 

According to the petitioner, the Commissioner, Printing, Stationary has placed orders, on the petitioner and two other agencies for supply of Indelible Ink Phails to be used in the election. The petitioner alleged he was to supply 1,75,000 units, but the authorities have accepted 13,000 units.

 

 

The Hyderabad bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on Friday pointed out how the same Police Establishment Board (PEB) which recommends transfers and postings of IPS officers to the state acts as an appellate forum for the aggrieved officers. The bench comprising Justice P. Swaroop Reddy and Ms Ranjana Chowdary was hearing a petition by Kurnool SP Dr K. Raghuram Reddy challenging his transfer from Kurnool to Hyderabad.

 

Additional Advocate General K.G. Krishna Murthy told the tribunal that it was mandatory both in terms of Prakash Singh case judgment and also as per the provisions of the administrative tribunals Act to appeal before the Board. He contended that the tribunals have no jurisdiction to look into the issues of transfers which are in the domain of the state.