Hyderabad: Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of Telangana High Court ordered status quo in a writ petition on construction of a boundary wall of the heritage structure Badshahi Ashoorkhana. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Mohammed Ovaize Hussain. The petitioner alleged that respondent authorities were interfering with the management of Sunni wakf property at Pathargatti outside the boundary of Badshahi Ashoorkhana and were allegedly constructing a boundary wall on open land situated outside the boundary wall of heritage structure. The petitioner contended that both the properties were two different wakf properties notified under two different gazette notifications.
On the other hand, the state argued that construction of the boundary wall was taken up pursuant to the interim orders of division bench passed in a PIL and the boundary wall was already constructed. The judge, while granting interim protection, noted that the order of the division bench, is with regards to construction of boundary wall only in respect of a heritage building and that, as seen from the photographs enclosed by petitioner, the boundary wall was already constructed for the heritage structure. The disputed land, according to the petitioners, is outside the heritage structure, where shops of the petitioners existed and subsequently demolished. The judge accordingly granted the status quo, existing as on date, until further orders and directed respondents to file their counter by August 14.
Notice to TSSPDCL MD in contempt case
Justice T. Madhavi of Telangana High Court ordered notice to the managing director and chief general manager of Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (TSSPDCL) in a contempt case challenging the non-appointment of petitioner despite court directions. The judge was hearing a contempt case filed by T. Gopal, who applied to the post of junior assistant-cum-computer operator pursuant to the notification dated September 28, 2019, issued by the respondents. The petitioner alleged that the respondent authorities wantonly failed to comply with the orders passed by the judge earlier in a writ plea. Earlier, the judge directed the respondent authorities to consider and issue appointment orders to the petitioner according to his merit and without reference to the presidential order issued by the state government vide several GOs. The petitioner alleged that despite directions, the respondent failed to comply and are guilty of contempt.
Internship, sick leave for BTech attendance
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed the Telangana higher education department, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University and Geethanjali College of Engineering Technology to consider the internship certificate and sickness certificate of a BTech student in calculating her attendance. The judge dealt with a writ plea filed by Madhagani Keerthi challenging the action of respondents in detaining her in IV Year I semester of BTech for shortage of attendance. The petitioner alleged that the respondents refused to consider her eight-day internship period certificates from ECIL and sickness certificates in calculation of her cumulative attendance and detained her. After hearing the petitioner, the judge disposed the writ plea directing the respondents to consider the certificates of the petitioner and publish her result.
Plea against school edu wing admitted
Justice Pulla Karthik of Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the state education department, Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Board and the Mahatma Jyothiba Phule Telangana Backward Classes Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society in not allowing a teacher to exercise the web option of preferences for the posting of trained graduate teacher. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Sameena Quatoon. The petitioner alleged that the education society was not allowing her to exercise web option of preferences despite possessing required qualification of MA, in line with the notification issued by respondents. The judge after hearing the petitioner directed the government pleader to get instructions from respondents and posted the matter for further adjudication.
