HC records HMDA version in cases involving two residential associations

Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court recorded the presence of the HMDA director. The court had summoned senior officials of the civic body for failure to produce relevant records in a writ appeal. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar, was dealing with an appeal filed by Lakhsmi mega township house owners welfare association.

The controversy related to whether the HMDA had heard the writ appellant, as required by an earlier order of the single judge. The writ petitioner had questioned the action of the HMDA in requiring the association to pull down a compound wall at the instance of Sri Sai Laxmi Colony Residents Welfare Association. A single judge directed that the petitioner be heard when the HMDA passed an order on the matter.

The petitioner came up with a fresh writ petition assailing the order of the HMDA both on merits and for it being in violation of the order of the single judge as it violated the principles of natural justice.

It was the case of the HMDA that it had heard both parties. It was the case of the appellant that a mere attendance sheet of the appellant being present would not amount to hearing the appellant as directed. The bench directed the appeal to be posted for hearing on merits on December 18.

Plea on biometrics at MG Law College spiked

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court rejected a writ appeal requiring biometric attendance in Mahatma Gandhi Law College. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar, repeatedly asked the counsel for the appellant how he was personally aggrieved by the lack of such a facility at the college.

The appellant, B. Saramma, filed the writ petition complaining of non-consideration of representation and permitting the college to run without mandatory Aadhaar-enabled biometric attendance devices and CCTV cameras.

A single judge had dismissed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present appeal to a similar result. The bench found no personal right of the petitioner being affected and said no consequential mandamus could be issued.

However, the bench left it open to the appellant to invoke the PIL jurisdiction of the court if so advised.

Nod to TTWREIS for inter-zone allotment

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar, modified its earlier order and permitted the Telangana Tribal Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society (TTWREIS) to proceed with inter-zone allotment of employees by the provisions of Telangana Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Orders, 2018. Earlier, the court had stayed the allotment while entertaining a writ petition filed by D. Mamatha Reddy and others.

The petitioner challenged the memo issued in July 2022 and the consequential allotment orders issued in September. The petitioners were allotted to different zones organising them into the local cadre. The petitioners said that the presidential order would not apply to their society.

Employees of the society, voicing an opposite view, filed a vacate application stating inter alia that the transfer was by the relevant rules and the very appointment was based on the same.

HC tells SHO, probe status quo violation

Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Monday directed the Mokila station house officer (SHO) to consider representation alleging violation of status quo order. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Mutyala Krishnaji Rao and another, complaining of inaction by the SHO in considering the petitioner’s complaint and interfering with a civil dispute between the petitioners and Omega Residencies. The petitioner contended that the injunction order of status quo was granted by the lower court and was subsisting. He alleged that the order was violated by Omega Residencies for which the police official had failed to take action.

Trading of theft charges baffles HC

Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court was intrigued when a petitioner and a private respondent traded allegations of theft against each other.

The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Syed Shams Uddin Noor, caretaker of Bibi Ka Chashma, complaining about the inaction of the Falaknuma police in registering a crime of mass attack on him on December 2.

He complained that this not only violated his right to life but also had the effect of violating his right to property. The petitioner claimed that the assault by the petitioner's stepfather and others, who used weapons against him and his wife, potentially constituted an offense of attempted murder.

During the proceedings, the judge expressed astonishment at the unique nature of the case where both parties were accusing each other of theft. The petitioner alleged that the assailants attacked him, while the accused parties countered with allegations of theft against the petitioner.