Don\'t entertain plea against GHMC notices, says HC

Hyderabad: Justice T. Vinod Kumar cautioned civil courts to refrain from entertaining petitions that challenge statutory notices issued by the GHMC against illegal constructions.

The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Nikileshwar Rao Inaganti, complaining of GHMC inaction against illegal constructions in Malkajgiri.

The GHMC said it had issued a notice but the respondent had secured a status quo order from a civil court. Justice Vinod referring to  acatena of judgements by the apex court directed the GHMC to take steps to vacate the orders issued by the civil court.

The judge directed the GHMC to communicate relevant circulars and the judgment to the civil court.

Plea filed against health varsty VC

Justice S. Nanda wanted the government to respond to a quo warranto writ filed against the continuance of Dr V. Karunakar Reddy as VC of the health university. Healthcare Reforms Doctors Association, which filed the petition, said Dr Reddy was continuing in office in violation of the Act. The Governor was arrayed as a party of the petition. Counsel Sama Sandeep Reddy said the mandamus sought was not against the constitutional authority, but against the university Chancellor who is a statutory authority.

I-T notice set aside as bad in law

The Telangana High Court set aside a notice by the income-tax officer to Virchow Drugs Limited as bad in law. The bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty was ruling on a writ plea filed by Virchow Drugs. Earlier, the court allowed the amalgamation of Virchow with Sri Drugs India Pvt Ltd. The I-T department issued notice to Sri Drugs on '3,06,25,283 income for AY 2016-17. Virchow said the court had given approval to the amalgamation and no proceedings could be drawn against a company that did not exist

HC takes on file SBI's objection

A bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice N.V Shravan Kumar  took on file a writ appeal by the SBI questioning the directions of a single judge asking it to consider an one-time settlement (OTS) for Annex Glass Industries. Annex Glass had moved the court after the SBI declared its loan account an NPA though the matter was before the debt recovery tribunal. The single judge directed the SBI to implement the OTS for Annex Glass.