Hyderabad: Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the police to permit a meeting of the TSRTC joint action committee (JAC) at Bus Bhavan. The JAC lodged a complaint before the court that their representations seeking permission to conduct the protest meeting to air their grievances from November were futile. The judge wondered how the union could be stopped from protesting. “If a trade union does not go on strike, then who will,” the judge wondered. Proceedings witnessed lighter moments when government pleader Mahesh Raje informed the court that the police would be busy supervising the mammoth crowds at RTC crossroads where people would be flocking to watch ‘Pushpa, The Rule 2’. RTC counsel said, light-heartedly, that the challenge would be if the union said ‘Taggede Le’, a popular dialogue of the protagonist in the film. The judge made it clear that the meeting should be restricted to about 300 people and no provocative statements will be made and the police will be free to take action if there is a law order problem.
PIL seeks action against illegal pet shops
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court took on file a PIL the functioning of unlicenced and illegal pet shops and their non-compliance with the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960. The panel, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao, was dealing with a PIL filed by Humane Society International/India. The petitioner complained that the state had failed to implement the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Pet Shop) Rules, 2018 ('Pet Shop Rules') and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Pet Shop) Rules, 2017 ('Dog Breeding & Marketing Rules'). It was the case of the petitioner that the Delhi High Court directed the authorities to finalise pet shop rules within 15 days from February 26, 2018, and accordingly the Union framed the rules. The petitioner alleged that the respondent authorities had failed to take any action against illegal pet shop owners. The petitioner sought a committee headed by a retired High Court judge to oversee/ monitor/ ensure that the respondents/ TSAWB/ and enforcement authorities were enforcing the various provisions with regard to Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The petitioner inter alia in the PIL sought a direction to carry out an awareness campaign to clarify the process of registration of pet shops and dog breeding centres with TSAWB. The panel considered the same and directed the state to file its response within four weeks.
Teachers can participate in poll campaigns: HC
Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court disposed of a writ plea challenging a notification issued by the Nalgonda district election officer and collector on November 20, prohibiting teachers from participating in election campaigning during school hours and in school premises. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by former MLC Battapuram Mohan Reddy. The petitioner argued that the notification exceeded the respondent's jurisdiction and sought that it be set aside. The petitioner contended that the instructions, which included stringent actions under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, for violations, were arbitrary and unjust. The notification directed officials to ensure teachers refrain from engaging in campaigning during school hours. This directive was issued as part of preparations for compiling the voter list for the upcoming teachers’ constituency elections in February 2025. The government pleader, appearing for the respondent authorities, clarified that the notification did not entirely prohibit teachers from campaigning. Instead, it restricted campaigning during school hours and on school premises to avoid disruption to academic activities. Campaigning during lunch hours outside school premises remained permissible. The judge observed that the authorities cannot impose restrictions on teachers participating in campaigning beyond school hours. Accordingly, the judge disposed of the writ plea with a directive, ensuring that campaigning activities do not interfere with the school’s functioning.
Food outlet challenges termination of contract in Sec railway station
Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the principal chief commercial manager of Rail Nilayam, South Central Railway, in terminating the license of a petitioner for running a catering stall. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Mathura Prasad and Sons, alleging that its licence for running a catering stall the Secunderabad railway station was terminated for false and frivolous reasons. It is further alleged that the petitioner was debarred from participating in the future similar contract/licence of the Indian Railways for a period of one year. The petitioner contended that the actions of the respondent authorities was illegal and amounts to overreaching of the powers. Counsel for the petitioner also brought to the notice of the judge that the stall of the petitioner was immediately seized without even giving an opportunity of removing articles and a tendered was also issued in respect of its stall. After hearing counsel for the petitioner, the judge directed the respondents not to take any steps that will make the writ plea infructuous. The judge also directed the respondent authorities to file their response and posted the matter for further adjudication.
HC takes up plea challenging denial of promotion to nurse
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court will hear a writ plea challenging the actions of the state director of public health and family welfare department in not considering the case of a nursing officer for promotion to the post of head nurse/senior nursing officer. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Jedidha Samuel, working as a nursing officer at the special prison for women, Chanchalguda. The petitioner was challenging the actions of the respondent authority in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post which is a non-selection post. The petitioner stated that seniority in the feeder category is the sole criteria and despite her being eligible and qualified, she was not being promoted. The petitioner contended that her name was included in the list drawn for filling up of vacant posts of senior nursing officer. However, her name was deleted due to pending departmental proceedings. The government pleader sought time to seek instructions.
