Hyderabad: Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court granted three weeks’ time to GHMC to kick start procedures under law against Babylon Bar and Kitchen, a popular eatery at Jubilee Hills.
The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Muzammil Asif, who complained of inaction on the part of the GHMC for their unauthorised and illegal structures.
According to the petitioner, the management of the bar deviated from the sanctioned plan and did not provide for parking facilities at the place. The petitioner also complained that he had given his car for valet parking when he visited the bar. But the valet driver drove the car negligently at high speed and hit the car which caused it a lot of damage.
The petitioner alleged that the incident had occurred due to the fact that the owners of Babylon Bar and Kitchen parked their cars 2-3 km away from it which is violative of GHMC norms. The judge said that the respondent should issue notice to Babylon Bar and Kitchen since time was sought by GHMC.
Don’t remove villagers from their land, says HC
Justice M. Sudheer Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed revenue authorities not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands at Khammam district for the greenfield highway.
The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by N. Sridhar and other villagers of Raghunath Palam mandal of Khammam district, to challenge a government notification to acquire their land for the construction of a proposed four-way lane access controlled greenfield highway from Warangal to Khammam districts.
The counsel for the petitioners argued that various provisions of the National Highways Act were not followed during the acquisition process. It was further argued that after issuance of the notification, all the petitioners submitted objections opposing the acquisition of their lands as per Section 3 C of the National Highways Act.
It was further contended that without hearing the objections and disposing of their claims the authorities issued a declaration under Section 3D of the Act.
During the hearing on Wednesday, when the government pleader sought further time to secure instructions, the court directed the respondent authorities not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands. The court will further hear the matter next week.
Land Allotment: Court extended stay for four more weeks
Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday extended the order of stay relating to the land allotment to private companies at Metllachintapur village in Jagtial district for an industrial corridor.
The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Menga Chinna Gangu and others, who are the residents of Metpally mandal, challenging the allotment of their assigned lands admeasuring 24 acres situated at Survey. No 498, and 506 of Metllachintapur village to private companies for the establishment of industrial corridor.
The petitioners contended that there was no notification to acquire the lands and there was no notice given to the petitioners pertaining to the acquisition. It was also contended that the authorities were trying to take away the lands of the petitioners without payment of any compensation or ex-gratia. It was further argued that the livelihood of the petitioners is entirely based on the income from the said land and the action of the authorities is contrary to Prohibition of Transfer (Assigned Lands) Act.
The High Court extended the stay of all the proceedings for a further period of four weeks.
HC issues notice in ACB trap case
Justice K. Surender of the Telangana High Court issued a notice in a bail application filed by the sub-inspector of police in an ACB trap case.
The judge was hearing a bail application filed by Gujjula Purshotam, SI of PS Mahbubnagar rural circle, who was arrested in a trap by Anti-Corruption Bureau officials. The trap was laid by the ACB based on a complaint filed by Gaggi Shekar, a resident of Saroornagar, alleging that the police SI demanded a bribe from him to act in his favour.
In spite of issuing a notice under Section 41-A of Cr.PC, the petitioner’s counsel claimed that police arrested the petitioner on the same day. He further argued that the arrest was illegal and without any reason and contrary to law laid down by the apex court.
The assistant public prosecutor, meanwhile, sought adjournment to seek instruction as the case relates to serious procedural violation. The court after hearing the parties adjourned the matter to November 16.
HC notice to society on 1,000 acre land in Shaikpet
A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court issued notice to Sree Radhika Co-operative Housing Society on regularising lands at Shaikpet village.
The bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice NV Shravan Kumar was dealing with a writ appeal preferred by the state.
The society filed the petition after the Telangana government refused to regularise land admeasuring 1,000 acres in Survey No. 129/90 of Shaikpet village in terms of the judgment in an appeal filed before the division bench in 2001.
Initially, the petitioner through a sale deed bought the land from Pukhraj Jain and Purushotham Reddy to claim benefits of a government order issued on January 28, 1982, under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976.
The respondent government issued another GO in June 1983 wherein it refused to recognise the title of the original vendor of the petitioner.
The court allowed the writ petition along with its batch and directed it to mutate the land in favour of the petitioner.
Aggrieved by the decision of the single judge, the respondent government filed a Writ Appeal wherein the division bench of the High Court had contravening views. Thereafter, it was referred to the third judge and it was directed that both the parties are required to maintain the status quo in respect of the lands in question till the contravention is resolved by a proper forum.
The same writ appeal was challenged before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed in 2001.
A representation was made by the petitioner society before the government and the same was rejected due to which a writ petition was filed. The present appeal is against the order of the single judge who allowed the writ petition.
The court issued notice to Sree Radhika Co-operative Housing Society and listed the matter on December 5.
