Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Tuesday refused to entertain an appeal filed by the state government against a direction to pay financial assistance to a candidate under Ambedkar Overseas Vidyanidhi (AOVN) and reiterated that without there being any sufficient cause, courts cannot delay the process. The panel comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Anil Kumar was dealing with an appeal filed by the department of social welfare and others. Earlier a writ petition was filed by Ganta Venkata Narahari challenging the rejection of sanctioning of scholarship to his son under the AOVN on the ground of exceeding the prescribed income ceiling. The petitioner contended that the AOVN was announced and guidelines for financial assistance of SC students for pursuing their higher studies in postgraduate programmes in foreign universities from 2013-14 were issued. The authorities thereafter selected the student taking into consideration the material on record and compelled him to leave the country. The main grievance of the petitioner was that since 2013, he was visiting all the officers concerned for sanction of scholarship as promised by the respondent authorities and submitted representations but there was no progress whatsoever except the correspondence between the authorities and himself. Finally, the commissioner, SC Development department, in response to his representations, informed that “application of the student has been rejected and he has not been sanctioned the scholarship due to exceeding the prescribed income ceiling of Rs 2 lakh as per the Rules in force.” Aggrieved by the same, the writ petition was filed. The single judge after hearing the parties and perusing the records said that it was an undisputed fact that the petitioner was a retired government servant receiving a pension of `20,230 per month and after deducting medical advance and housing loan, the annual income of the petitioner came to `1,85,167 and the tahasildar, Karimnagar, had issued an income certificate showing the annual income as `1.70 lakh. The judge considering the same allowed the writ petition and said, “In the said circumstances, this court deems it proper to direct the authorities concerned to sanction and pay the financial assistance to the son of the petitioner under the AOVN.” On Tuesday, the panel refused to entertain an appeal filed with a delay of 161 days. The panel ruled that when the application for condonation did not reflect sufficient cause, the court could not condone the delay merely because the appeal was filed by the state.
Status quo ordered on Khammam land
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court ordered the status quo to be maintained with regard to land admeasuring about seven acres at Pokalagudem, Khammam district. The panel comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao was dealing with an appeal filed by Gajula Laxman and another. Earlier a writ petition was filed by the appellants challenging a government order issued by the tribal welfare department in July 2008. The petitioner contended that they were in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land since 1967 and the same was reflected in the revenue records. The petitioner contended that proceedings were initiated against them under the AP Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulations with respect to their land and after a detailed inquiry proceedings were dropped against them. It was the case of the appellants that one Islavath Ramulu filed a statutory appeal which was allowed by the authorities and no relief was granted to the tribal, aggrieved by which the petitioners and other filed a revision before the state and the same was dismissed. The petitioners argued that when the primary authority dropped the proceedings on the basis of material evidence the action of the appellant authority and the state without appreciating the possession of the petitioner, ordering for eviction was unjust and illegal. It was argued by the petitioner that repeated inquiries were not permissible and it amounted to harassment. The judge dismissed the writ petition against which the unsuccessful petitioners were in appeal. On Tuesday, it was argued that the order of a single judge was unreasoned and no findings were recorded while dismissing of the writ petition. The panel after hearing the arguments ordered notices and directed the status quo to be maintained.
Alleged illegal construction challenged
Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) and other authorities for not taking action against alleged unauthorised constructions carried out by Penuel House of Worship (PHW) situated in Bandlaguda. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Gopala Krishna Puram Residents Welfare Association which alleged that the respondent authorities had failed to take any action against the unauthorised construction by the unofficial respondent. The petitioner stated that it had addressed multiple representations to the GHMC in respect of the alleged illegal construction, yet no action was seen to be taken. Standing counsel for the respondent authorities apprised the judge that a show cause notice was issued to PHW to submit an explanation within seven days from the date of its receipt. As the time period of show cause did not expire, standing counsel for the respondents sought time to inform the judge on the actions taken in the matter. Accordingly, the matter was posted for further hearing.
Endowments dept response sought
Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the notification issued by the commissioner of the state endowments department inviting applications for the constitution of a non-hereditary trust board for the Sri Ambha Bhavani temple in Elikatta of Farooqnagar mandal in Ranga Reddy district. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by archaka Gulle Bhavani Shankar. The petitioner alleged that he was a member of the founder family of the temple and the respondent failed to issue an official notification calling for applications from interested persons for constituting the board. Instead, the petitioner alleged, the respondent issued a news article calling for applications, in contravention of the Telangana Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act and rules. The petitioner stated that his claim for declaration as a member of the founder’s family under the Act was pending. Standing counsel for the respondent department argued that notification was rightly issued in Form-1 and the writ plea was liable to be dismissed. The judge directed the respondent department to file a detailed response and posted the matter for further adjudication.
