Telangana High Court asks each PS for four car film violation challans

HYDERABAD: The High Court on Thursday asked the state government to furnish four challans from each police station of fines imposed on vehicles using dark films during the current year, on a writ petition filed by one T. Dhanagopal, who complained to the court that the police were not complying with the Supreme Court directions. The top court guidelines prohibit the use of dark films on windowpanes of cars that affect visibility. The petitioner, alleging a large-scale violation, made the commissioner of police and superintendent of police of all districts respondents.

A statement prepared by the director general of the traffic police cell, placed in the court, stated that 48,675 challans were issued from 2012 till date, but Dhanagopal argued that there was no proof of implementation. The next hearing is scheduled for April 24.

Writ petition filed by prosecutor dismissed

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court on Thursday dismissed a writ petition filed by the joint director of prosecution-cum-public prosecutor Aligi Shankar, who challenged a charge memo issued to him on April 1. He is alleged to be involved in three criminal cases in Bhongir. He contended that the power of the home department to have disciplinary control over the director of prosecutions was contrary to the law. Counsel K. Narasimha would argue the merging of the prosecution with the executive is unconstitutional. The bench had recently admitted a similar writ petition. When the bench faulted the role of the public prosecutor and his involvement in criminal cases, Shankar sought leave to withdraw his writ petition accordingly.

Orders reserved over petitions on VRO posts

The division bench of the Telangana High Court, headed by Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, on Thursday, reserved orders over a batch of petitions challenging the abolition of village revenue officer (VRO) posts and redeploying VROs in the revenue department to other departments. Kowturu Pawan Kumar, Chikkudu Prabhakar, Sriram Polali and Krishnaiah, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, contended that there are nearly 5,038 transfers, to which Advocate General B.S. Prasad placed before the bench a written note regarding the same. The petitioners further contended that it violated fundamental rights and was in violation of various judgments passed by the Supreme Court. Both parties were directed to file their written arguments on or before April 28.