Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court required the Additional Advocate General to appraise the court with ensuing counselling dates for admission to the LLB and LLM courses. The panel comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar is dealing with a PIL filed by A. Bhasker Reddy, a practising advocate who appeared party in person. The petitioner complained about the delay in the process of admission into LLB and LLM courses in the state of Telangana for the academic year 2023-24. He argued that such a delay amounts to breach of substantive legitimate expectations. He sought for a direction from the court against respondents to strictly adhere to the academic calendar by completing the counselling and admissions into LLB, LLM and other law courses before July each year beginning with the present academic year 2024-25 as per UGC norms. The panel, while directing the Additional Advocate General to appraise the counselling dates adjourned the matter to July 16.
Appointment of Mattapalli temple board trustees challenged
Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging appointment of the chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam at Mattapalli. The judge is dealing with a writ plea filed by Kande Venkateswarlu challenging the appointment of Chennuri Mattapalli Rao and Chennuri Vijay Kumar as chairman and member of the board. The petitioner alleged that the unofficial respondents are not founders or members of the founder’s family of the devasthanam. The petitioner contended that such an appointment was illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Acts. On the other hand, the counsel representing the endowments department argued that persons were hereditary trustees of one Narasimha Rao, who was declared as a founder-member by the assistant commissioner of the endowments department in 2015. The judge, after perusing the records, ordered personal notices to the unofficial respondents and posted the matter for further adjudication.
Panel to look into PIL on non-implementation free education act PIL
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court will adjudicate on the PIL qua non-implementation of provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The panel comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar is dealing with a public interest litigation filed by Thandava Yogesh, a practising advocate. The petitioner complained of non-implementation of the section of the said Act which prescribes mandatory 25 per cent of admissions to Class I and pre-school education if available, in all private schools. The petitioner contended that even after 10 academic years, authorities have failed to implement the same, thereby infringing on the fundamental rights of more than Rs 10 lakhs of minor kids belonging to weaker sections and disadvantaged groups. The panel earlier appointed senior advocate Sunil B. Ganu as amicus curiae to assist the court. On Tuesday, special government pleader S. Rahul Reddy stated to the court that they have filed an affidavit pertaining to the steps taken by the government in implementing the same. The panel adjourned the matter to next week for amicus to examine the affidavit and assist the court in further adjudication.
Writ on state’s insensitivity in exercising power of transfer
Yet again, Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the state insensitivity in exercising power of transfer. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Kancharla Buchi Reddy, an employee at Nalgonda and Rangareddy Milk Producers Mutually Aided Cooperative Union. The petitioner alleged that the authorities failed to consider his representations seeking his transfer to his native place or surroundings of Chityala Mandal Nalgonda district despite the fact that his parents are almost 95 years old and he is their only son. The petitioner further alleged that due to his transfer, he is unable to take care of his parents. The petitioner also complained that he was transferred without following the due process of law. After hearing the petitioner, the judge ordered notice to respondent authorities.
St Mary’s college writ dismissed
Justice Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by St Mary’s Engineering College challenging the action of the Polycet convener, commissioner of technical education, and others, in refusing to provide the benefit of the fee reimbursement in respect of 50 seats filled by the management under minority quota for the academic year 2014-15. The institution challenged the action of the Polycet convener in approving admissions made by the petitioner under minority quota as admissions of spot admissions instead of the convener quota and sought that the said 50 admissions be approved under the convener category upon which it be granted the benefit of fee reimbursements to students admitted under minority quota as per merit list of Polycet 2014. The judge, after hearing the parties, dismissed the case by observing that the institution has no locus standi to approach the court as it is for the affected students to approach before an appropriate forum for the remedy against the impugned action.
