Hyderabad: A bench of the Telangana High Court of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji made it clear that every complaint on encroachment of government land cannot lead to filing a writ plea. The bench upheld the objection of the registry and closed the petition filed by one Ahmed Khan. Chief Justice Bhuyan voiced concern at the menace of land grabbing and encroachment of government land and said it was a serious matter but every incident cannot be converted into a PIL unless it is of such a magnitude that it will affect the public.
The bench noted that the complaint was about encroaching upon eight acres of land at Mohammednagar near the railway tracks. The tahsildar was taking action, the bench noted and added it is for the government to take action to protect its land.
Can’t stall grant of podu land: HC
The bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji took on file yet another writ petition dealing with alienation of land in scheduled areas for local tribes. Avinash Desai, senior counsel, appearing for Sandeep Reddy Kuncharam, pointed out that the memo was contrary to an undertaking given by the Telangana government to the Supreme Court. Land up for distribution now and beneficiaries were substantially different from the undertaking, he pointed out.
The bench reiterated its earlier order that it was not inclined to stall the grant of podu land. However, quashing of the same shall be strictly in accordance with the Forest Dwellers Act. The bench also made it clear that if there were any wrongs, the petitioners can always move the court.
HC sets aside single judge order on police protection
The Telangana High Court set aside an order of a single judge extending police protection in a dispute between private parties. The bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji reiterated that consequent upon an injunction, the High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, should not be directing police protection of private parties.
Maleka Begum and three residents of Prakashnagar had filed a writ appeal before the bench complaining that the High Court had granted police protection to one Vema Ashok Kumar on the ground that there was an ad interim injunction in a civil suit between him and multiple builders. The appellants contended that there was no injunction towards them and in any event the court could not have granted police protection in a civil dispute and ought to have required the parties to move the civil court for reliefs based on the injunction.
Single judge order on Munnuru Kapu board’s bank account set aside
Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji set aside directions of the single judge permitting Akula Panduranga Rao to operate the bank account of the Munnuru Kapu vidyarthi vasathi graham trust board. Prof. Venkat Rao, managing trustee of the Munnuru Kapu Board had filed a writ petition questioning the decision of the Union Bank in freezing the bank account of the trust board, whose members were jammed in litigation. Prof. Venkat Rao said that during a short period of his illness, Panduranga Rao was nominated as board chairman. The temporary board hijacked the management of the trust, he said.
Earlier, a single judge had directed the warring parties to sort their disputes by moving a trust suit and directed Union Bank to permit Panduranga Rao to operate the bank account. Senior counsel Sunil Ganu pointed out that it would amount to an interim order in favour of the respondent in a case filed by the writ petitioner. The directions made by the single judge were accordingly set aside. When counsel for Panduranga Rao pointed out that this would handicap issuance of scholarships, the Chief Justice observed that if he was so concerned then he may as well permit Prof. Venkat Rao to operate the account. The bench passed no orders and left it to the parties to fight it out in the civil court.
