Hyderabad: Justice S. Nanda of the Telangana High Court on Monday directed the Government dental college in Hyderabad to respond to a dental student’s writ plea for taking her fourth-year examination. The petitioner complained of inaction by the college in granting permission for practical examination despite allowing her in the written examination on oral medicine and radiology. It is the case of the petitioner, Nethala Shiphrah Israel, that while she was allowed to give a written examination as per the court order when it came to taking the practical examinations, the college did not permit her. The petitioner was before the court stating that the action was due to shortage of attendance. The court in view of the same directed the respondent college to file a counter and posted the matter to February 27. The court also granted that in case of any objection, the petitioner may file an application to the court.
Restaurant in marriage hall: HC reserves verdict
Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Monday reserved orders in a writ plea challenging the actions of Jagtial municipality in seizing the petitioner's leased premises. The petitioner, Kotagiri Ajay Kumar, contended that the leased premises situated opposite the municipal park in Jagtial was the popular Anand Bhavan grand restaurant, Anand Bhavan hotel, and Chat Mantra food stall at the Town Hall had belonged to the petitioner and the same has been seized by the respondent authorities without the authority of law. On the other hand, the respondent authority contended that they have the power to seize the same. The court was of the opinion that town halls are established for the purposes of performing marriages and functions but not for running a restaurant and remarked that no material is placed on record to show that it is being run as a marriage hall and not a restaurant and that the same ought not to be used for the purpose of running restaurants. As the petitioner sought for removal of the seal/seizure of the leased premises, the court directed that orders in this matter be reserved until February 20.
Hyderabad Police Act provisions questionedThe two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court on Monday ordered notice in a PIL filed by a law student questioning the vires section 47 of the Hyderabad City Police Act. As per this section, the city police commissioner, by virtue of his office, and any DCP, especially empowered in this behalf by the Government, shall have all the powers of a district magistrate for any investigation or any other proceedings. The challenged provision grants judicial power to police officers issuing search warrants. The law student Vijay Gopal contended that vesting of such judicial powers in an executive authority was ultra vires Article 15 of the constitution. He said that this was in violation of the doctrine of separation of powers. The aspiring lawyer also said that an IPS officer cannot be deployed in an IAS cadre post and vice-versa as per the All India Services Act read with Indian Administrative Service Cadre Rules as per the notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievance and Pensions Department of Personnel and Training. Additionally, the petitioner sought direction from the state police to follow the procedure as per the criminal law laid down. The court posted the matter after four weeks while directing the department of Home to file a counter.
Outsource employees cannot seek regularisation
A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court refused to interfere with an order passed by the principal district and sessions judge, Ranga Reddy district on the administrative side, terminating the services of some contract employees. N. Suresh Kumar and 27 others, working on a contract basis, filed a writ petition challenging the orders of termination passed by the principal district and sessions judge RR district. The petitioner contended that the impugned termination orders were in contravention of an earlier order of a division bench of the High Court declaring that some of the petitioners are entitled to regularization of their services in the existing vacancies. Senior counsel G. Vidya Sagar, appearing for the respondents, contended that the petitioners are outsourcing employees and they have no right to compel that their service should be continued till their age of superannuation. Their services are liable to be terminated as and when regular recruitment takes place. The Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar found favour with the contentions of the senior counsel and dismissed the writ petition.
HC allows writ appeal in warehousing tender case
A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court set aside interim orders passed by a single judge directing TS State Warehousing Corporation to consider the price bid of a bidder in respect of a tender notice issued in October without reference to disqualification of technical bid dated 09.01.2024. Earlier, the corporation issued tender notice (04.10.2023) for the construction of 990O MT capacity godowns, including ancillary works at TSWC, Marikal village and mandal, Narayanapet district with an estimated value of Rs 8.83 crore. During the tender process, the corporation declared that the bid of NJR Constructions was disqualified as its bid was not in conformity with the tender notice and declared that Chittari Hemchand & Durga Vallikarjuna Sai Constructions have been qualified. Challenging its disqualification and also challenging the action of the corporation in qualifying Respondent 4 & 5, it filed a writ petition. A single judge passed an interim order directing the corporation to consider the bid of the writ petitioner. The bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar allowed the writ appeal filed by one of the qualified bidders and requested a single judge to hear the writ petition.
Search and seizure of realtor company challenged
Justice K. Sujana of the Telangana High Court granted three days for filing a response to a bunch of criminal petitions challenging the search and seizure of the premises of Vesella Greens. According to the petitioner, the land about Ac.281 -00 Gts situated in Budvel village is subject to the controversy of the said land of Acc-26-00 Gts allotted to 66 assignees and 82 encroachers. The tahsildar directed to demarcate as per the sketch of the mandal surveyor. After allotment was made, some allottees executed a registered agreement of sale-cum-GPA in favour of A&U Infra Projects, a sister concern of the petitioner and 148 registered sale deeds were executed on behalf of allottees in favour of Vesella Greens. The petitioner also moved earlier seeking directions to the revenue authorities and HMDA for physical demarcation of plots and boundaries of the layout along with the road by providing infrastructure facilities, pursuant to the layout approved by the director, HMA. It is compliantly presented by batch petitioners that the premises of the company and other directors and staff of Vesella Greens was searched and laptops, electronic gadgets and documents were seized and taken away by the police when the search and seizure was based on an order of criminal court. The assistant commissioner of police, CCS, Hyderabad moved a requisition before the court complaining that the four complaints were largely against the accused. The said criminal case took Rs 1,181,00,000, Rs 1,20,00,000, Rs 1,20,00,000 and Rs 1,20,00,000, respectively for registration of subject land in their names, that the accused did not register the land in their names nor returned the amount to them. It is also the case of the prosecution that the said accused person executed MOU in favour of U & A Infra Projects to get the land admeasuring 23,000 sq. yards for an amount of Rs 27,00,00,000. In the requisition, it is also stated that the tahsildar, Rajendranagar, registered lands in favour of the allottees, who in turn registered the plots in favour of Vesella Greens through the GPA holder U&A infra projects. In this context, it is submitted that the petitioner company paid full consideration to all the allottees and got the registered sale deed in its name. However, the requisition by the police states that U&A Infra projects and the petitioner had colluded with each other and they are habituated to illegal trespass into government land.
It is the special case of Justice K. Sujana and senior counsels M.V.S. Suresh Kumar and Uma Maheswar contended that the order of criminal court was passed in a very casual manner whereas the public prosecutor tried to explain the offence to the judge and cut short the argument saying that the court will not be hearing the matter on merits but only dealing with the order of criminal court. The public prosecutor also pointed the proceedings of liability to be dismissed on the grounds that the complainant was not made a party.
