Hyderabad: A division bench of the Telangana High Court took on file a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the inaction of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in considering the concerns over illegal leasing of lands by the ministry of tourism. The two-judge panel comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sreenivas Rao was hearing a PIL filed by social activist Bakka Judson. The petitioner complained that three acres of government land at Gachibowli village, Serilingampally, was illegally leased to M/s Saptarishi Hotels Pvt Ltd (SHPL) in July, 2010, thereby causing loss of approximately `160 crore to the public exchequer. The petitioner stated that he wrote to the CBI bringing to its notice the alleged illegal leasing of land and requested the investigating authority to conduct investigation against the Youth Advancement, Tourism and Culture Department, Telangana State Tourism Development Corporation and others. The petitioner would allege that as no action was taken by CBI, he was constrained to file the PIL. The petitioner sought a direction against the Chief Secretary to conduct a detailed investigation against the authorities under the ministry of tourism. The panel, after hearing the petitioner, ordered notice to respondent authorities and posted the matter for further adjudication.
Consider claims of tribals: HC to officials
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed the Nagarkurnool district collector, sub-divisional level committee for Nagarkurnool district and other authorities to consider the representations of individuals belonging to the Chenchu tribe recognised as ‘Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups’. The judge dealt with a batch of writ pleas filed by Dasari Chitaiah and others, challenging the eviction notice issued by the Nagarkurnool Forest Range Officer under the Telangana Forests Act. (TFA) The petitioners alleged that eviction notices issued to the petitioners were contrary to the Central Legislation Schedule Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (ROFR Act). The counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioners are ‘Forest Dwelling Scheduling Tribe’ under the ROFR Act, who primarily reside in and depend on the forests or forest land for bonafide livelihood with a right of habitation or self-cultivation for their livelihood. The counsel argued that the eviction notices were issued alleging that the Bommanapally village is recognised as a reserve forest under the TFA and as such the petitioners were undertaking illegal activities in the land. The counsel pointed out that the eviction notices were issued without verifying the representation of the president of the Forest Rights Committee, submitted to the district collector for granting individual pattas to the Chencus. The counsel for the petitioner also argued that no member of a forest dwelling schedule tribe can be evicted or removed from forest land under his occupation till the recognition and verification procedure is complete as per 4(5) of the TMA. The judge after hearing the petitioner directed the respondent authorities to consider the claims of the petitioners as per law and to refrain from taking any coercive steps against the petitioners till their claims are considered.
Education officials face another case of contempt
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the secretary of Telangana higher education department, commissioner of intermediate education and the principal of Nizamabad Government Junior College in a contempt case relating to the payment of salary of a contract junior lecturer. The judge was hearing a contempt case filed by B. Sailu, lecturer at the Nizamabad Government Junior College. The petitioner alleged that the authorities wantonly failed to comply with the interim direction passed by the judge earlier in a writ plea. Earlier, the judge had passed an interim order directing the commissioner of intermediate education to consider the representation of the petitioner for payment of salary and pass appropriate order preferably within a period of four weeks. The petitioner alleged that despite the direction, the respondent authority failed to comply and is guilty of contempt. Accordingly, the judge ordered notice and posted the matter for further adjudication.
State told not to interfere in tobacco firm biz
‘Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed the state home department, the DGP, commissioner of police and other authorities to refrain from interfering with the business operations of a firm involved in the business of tobacco products. The judge dealt with a writ plea filed by HH Patel and Co., a firm involved in the manufacturing, storage, distribution, and sale of tobacco products. The petitioner sought judicial intervention to prevent repeated interference by state authorities in their business operations across various districts of Telangana. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the firm’s business activities were being continually disrupted by the authorities, making it difficult for them to operate smoothly. The counsel also emphasised that the firm is engaged in legal business and is not involved in the sale of any illegal products. The judge, after hearing the parties, remarked that while the business and consumption of tobacco products may be legally permitted, they are still subjects of health concerns. The judge directed the respondent authorities to refrain from interfering with the petitioners’ business operations and made it clear that his order does not protect the petitioner from lawful actions if it is found to be in violation of any regulations.
