Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar on Wednesday directed Adilabad municipal commissioner to explain her stance alleging her involvement with land mafia to encroach a park in Adilabad. In a taken-up PIL based on a letter addressed to the court, it was alleged that a children’s park in Housing Board Colony, Adilabad, is being encroached on by some miscreants, and a temple named after Lord Shiva was also constructed. It was further contended that though the parents of the children and other elders have given several representations to the authorities, no action has been taken by the authorities concerned. It was also alleged that A Shailaja, who is presently working as Adilabad municipal commissioner is aiding and advising the mafia to encroach on the park land and other government lands. The matter has been adjourned to April 18 for further hearing.
Appeal against non-payment of bonus by LIC dismissed
A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar on Wednesday dismissed an appeal challenging the non-payment of incentive bonus by the Life Insurance Corporation. A writ appeal was filed by K. Raghunatha Rao against the dismissal of his plea by a single judge. He contended that the petitioner was appointed as a development officer in the LIC of India in 1986 and worked to the satisfaction of the corporation. For the hard work and business achievements of the petitioner, he had been included in the senior business associate cadre, where the petitioner was permitted to collect premium amounts from policyholders and issue receipts on behalf of the corporation by setting up a separate office purely for the purpose of service of policyholders and imparting training to the agents. The corporation had issued the circular to protect the interest of development officers who after great strain imparted business skills to the agents and after learning the same if they appointed their spouses or near relatives through other development officers, it would cause loss to the petitioner and an unhealthy competition would prevail among the development officers to snatch away new agents and their business credit. The petitioner was put to huge financial loss, as both agents working under the petitioner had been appointed their respective spouses as agents through other development officers. As per the circular for granting a new agency to relatives of existing agents, they can be made direct or kept under the same development officer (as the existing agent) whether the spouse was staying with the existing agent or not. The judge was of the considered view that the circular does not bar the spouse from being appointed as an agent. Further, the contention of the petitioner that the scheme of CLIA had been created without the approval of the IRDA one agent cannot recruit another agent, and no special provisions were given to the LIC by the IRDA with regard to the recruitment of an agent by agent, can be challenged in a proper forum. Accordingly, the bench disposed of the matter directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum and implead necessary parties.
Wakf CEO told to file stand on joint survey
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday sought a detailed stance from the chief executive officer (CEO) of the Telangana State Wakf Board and the district collector of the Hyderabad district pertaining to their inaction in conducting the joint survey of a property near the Dargah Hazarath Shah Quli Bahadur RH Graveyard. It is the case of petitioner N. Srinivas Rao that the CEO of the Telangana State Wakf Board, district collector of the Hyderabad district, and authorities such as GHMC and others did not conduct the joint survey in respect of the land near Kabaddi Stadium, Hyderabad and the waqf institution known as Dargah Hazarath Shah Quli Bahadur RH Graveyard and Ashoorkhana. It is alleged that illegal and unauthorised construction was taking place at the instance of the CEO of the Telangana State Wakf Board. The petitioner contended that representations were submitted to the authorities which went unheard. The court gave the same time to the respondents to file their responses.
