HC Refuses Plea Seeking IOC Outlet Vacate Premises

Hyderabad: Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court on Thursday refused to direct Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) to vacate its retail outlet at Nagarjunasagar of Hyderabad at the instance of the landowners, Punjala Geetha Lakshmi and two others. As per the agreement, the owners contended that an agreement to enhance monthly rent of '3,30,000 with escalation was not followed and alleged that the respondents also squatted on the property.

Indian Oil Corporation, on the other hand, contended that it had requested the petitioner to sign the sub-lease agreement, and vide letter in December 2017, the respondent corporation requested the petitioner for extension of the lease deed in pursuance to Clause 12 of the lease agreement. The respondent was still keen to execute the lease agreement if the landowners agreed. The petitioners complained that the owner of the property cannot seek the remedy of re-delivery of possession of the property as a public law remedy.

This court opined that there were disputed questions of fact involved in the present case, if the specific plea of the petitioner is that as per Clause 12 of the lease agreement entered into by the petitioner and the corporation, the corporation “had to give a notice not less than three months prior to the expiration of the lease deed expressing its desire of renewing the lease deed”, which according to the petitioners, had not been done in the present case by the corporation.

 “In spite of the petitioners’ repeated requests, there was no response from the corporation as to the extension of the lease deed nor the premises was vacated nor rents have been received by the petitioner,” it was alleged. On the contrary, the specific plea of the respondent was that the letter dated December 2017 was well in advance of the expiry of the lease deed in June 2018.

Vide letters dated July 2021 and September 2021, “the respondent corporation requested the landowners to come forward to complete the registration process and petitioners had failed to sign the documents and complete the registration of the lease,” the judge observed, dismissing the writ petition.

HC tells state govt to consider medical officer’s promotion

Justice N. Rajeshwar Rao of the Telangana High Court on Thursday directed the state government to consider the case of a petitioner for promotion on par with his juniors, tackling a writ petition filed by Dr K. Balu, additional DM of ITDA Utnoor, Adilabad, questioning the failure on the part of the authorities to consider his case on the ground that an FIR was pending against him. He said he was involved in a trap case in 2014, and that the scientific method by using samples of phenolphthalein powder and sodium carbonate powder was conducted, and he was proven not guilty. He pointed out that in 2017, he became eligible for promotion to additional director, when five posts were vacant to be filled in the panel year 2017-18.

He also pointed out that the inquiry against him was not completed despite the specific time fixed by the government, of six months, and was currently pending. He pointed out that despite the lapse of several years, no chargesheet was filed either. Justice Rajeshwar Rao found the rejection was not because of his ineligibility and only because of the non-availability of vacancies of Additional Directors, reasoning that if there was a vacancy, the petitioner must have been promoted.

“So, the question of ineligibility of the petitioner does not arise in the present case. Once there is a specific condition to complete the inquiry within a specified time, due to the delay of the government, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer for getting a promotion,” the court observed, rejecting the petitioner’s case on the ground of non-availability of vacancies, but not due to the ineligibility of the petitioner.