Telangana HC Extends Interim Orders on Pharma Firm’s OTS Plea

 Hyderabad: Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court extended interim orders granted in favour of a pharma company seeking a one-time settlement (OTS) with banks in view of the Covid scenario. The petitioner, Shine Industries, moved the court to protect its unit situated in Manoharabad mandal, Medak district, from being alienated under the Sarfaesi Act by the senior branch manager of Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation (APSFC), Ramachandrapuram. The petitioner earlier approached the court seeking reconsideration of its letters to the bank to consider its OTS offer and waiver of interest amounts in lieu of the petitioner’s pharma business not recovering from the Covid-19 effect. The court had ordered reconsideration of the petitioners’ grievances and directed the bank not to initiate any coercive steps. The petitioner yet again approached the High Court challenging the notice issued by the senior branch manager of APSFC, Ramachandrapuram, in March 2024 seeking payment of over Rs 1.54 crore to be cleared within 10 days failing which recovery action under the Sarfaesi Act would be initiated. The petitioner alleged that this notice was issued without giving an opportunity of being heard as was earlier directed by the court in an earlier order. After hearing the parties, the judge extended the interim orders.

RTC manager gets contempt notice

Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the regional manager of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TGSRTC), Karimnagar region, in a contempt case relating to non-grant of special grade increment to a record tracer for a period of 20 years. The judge was hearing a contempt case filed by N. Ramulu, a retired record tracer, with respondent authorities. The petitioner alleged deliberate non-compliance by the respondent authorities of the earlier directions passed by the judge. Earlier the petitioner approached the court with a writ plea complaining that his special grade increment for 20 years was denied on the ground that he did not spend his effective service as driver despite the fact that he was offered the alternative job of record tracer by respondent authorities for being declared medically unfit. The judge in the writ plea held that the respondents were taking a hyper-technical ground for denying the petitioner 20 years of special grade increment and directed the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the earlier precedents and grant special grade increment of 20 years of service as a driver. The petitioner complained that despite the directions, the respondent authorities had failed to comply.

HC reserves order on BRS plea

Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court reserved verdict on a plea filed by BRS Nagole challenging the rejection of the regularisation of a construction at Nalgonda. The petitioner contended that proceedings of the Nalgonda municipal corporation rejecting an application for regularisation of construction were in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner argued that total land admeasuring 100 acres in survey nos 1498 and 1506, situated in Nalgonda village was allotted by the government and opportunity ought to have been given before a final decision was made in this regard. The counsel for the petitioner contended that before the demolition, even illegal occupants are given notice, and hence the petitioner also deserved an opportunity for redressal. The judge, however, reserved his verdict.

Senior citizen seeks increment, pension due

The Telangana High Court will adjudicate the claim of a senior citizen alleging non-release of his increment and other pensionary benefits. Justice Pulla Karthik was hearing a writ plea filed by one Sathyanarayana Rao against the principal secretary, BC welfare department, and Telangana Backward Classes Cooperative Finance Corporation. The petitioner alleged inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in taking any steps for releasing his increment amount and other pensionary benefits. The petitioner contended that action of the authorities in making him run from pillar to post for his legitimate claim was illegal and arbitrary. The judge, after hearing the petitioner, directed the counsel representing the state to seek instructions from authorities and posted the matter for further adjudication.