Hyderabad: Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar of the Telangana High Court directed the state government to appraise the court regarding land acquisition for the Udayasamudram lift irrigation scheme. The judge was dealing with a petition filed by Sunkaraboina Paramesh and other residents of Matyalammagudem in Nalgonda district challenging the proceedings initiated to acquire their land for construction of the scheme’s canals. Counsel for the petitioners argued that the procedure under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 was not followed. They contended that the declaration under the law has to be passed within one year of the preliminary notification while the authorities delayed the process by a further period of nine months, by which time the proceedings had already lapsed as per law. Counsel argued that the notices were issued in English and no opportunity to oppose the acquisition was provided. On the other hand, the government pleader contended that the delay in publication was due to the reasons that the authorities were busy with the 2018 elections. The court after hearing both parties directed the government pleader to get further instructions for such lapses and violation of procedures contemplated under the Act. The court will hear the case again on September 11.
HC stays prosecution of Edu agency
Justice K. Anupama Chakravarthy of the Telangana High Court extended an interim stay of prosecution against an education agency for alleged data theft. The judge was dealing with a petition filed by Phani Bhushan Botu Raghavan, director of ISM Focal Point. It is stated that the petitioner’s firm is engaged in recruiting candidates desiring to study medicine at the International School of Medicine, Kyrgyzstan. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 3 in a case filed by V. Raghuram, director of Medico Abroad. The complainant alleged that the petitioner is using complainants’ employees and data for recruiting the candidates without his knowledge, which is against the contract entered by them and would amount to cheating and breach of trust. It was contended that he had filed a petition in the trial court which was referred to the Banjara Hills police and a chargesheet was filed. Counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no element of cheating as the relationship between the parties is contractual in nature. He argued that the main ingredients of cheating were absent and hence no criminal case could be made out. Counsel for the complainant contended that due to the criminal acts of the petitioner, he was suffering huge financial losses.
HC admits local temple trustee board case
The interim order stopping the takeover by the newly constituted board of trustees of Sri Sahashralingeshwara Swamy temple was extended by the High Court. Justice C. Sumalatha of the Telangana High Court passed the order in a writ plea filed by Kotha Angi Reddy, and another, questioning proceedings of the commissioner of endowments in constituting the Non-Hereditary Trust Board of the temple situated at Kamalanagar, near ECIL crossroads. The petitioner contended that it is only the dharmic operation that can make the said appointment and not the commissioner. While the government would contend that the annual income of the temple was less than Rs 25 lakh, the statement of the manager of the endowments department revealed the income to be above Rs 30 lakh. The judge considering the same had earlier stayed the functioning of the newly constituted board. The court extended the order till October 18.
Defence writ against civic authorities
The question of private multi-storeyed construction coming within the prohibited distance of military area came up for judicial review before the High Court. Justice T. Vinod Kumar is dealing with a writ plea filed by the Centre seeking the cancellation of construction permission in favour of private parties in Bandlaguda Jagir, Rajendranagar, as being contrary to guidelines of the defence ministry. Multiple writ petitions have been filed challenging different permissions as being contrary to the guidelines. It was contended by the beneficiaries that the local municipal laws do not require consultation with the station commander before approval of a building plan. The apprehension of security hazards is not a factor in the law. The defence authorities, on the other hand, alleged a hasty fait accompli in the action of the civic authorities. The court had earlier stayed such constructions. Justice Vinod Kumar wondered how tall multi-storeyed buildings were permitted near the cantonment area at Mehdipatnam and Golconda. The court granted time to the commissioner, Bandlaguda Jagir, and posted the matter to September 27.
