Hyderabad: A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar of the Hyderabad High Court on Monday expressed displeasure at the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation for not filing a compliance report with regard to the action taken by it to remove encroachments on footpaths.
The bench was dealing with a petition by Laxminivas Agarwal, a resident of Mahbub-gunj, seeking removal of encroachments and una-uthorised constructions along road margins in Siddiambar Bazaar and Mahbubgunj. The bench on Decem-ber 15, 2014, had directed the GHMC to remove these encroachments in Siddiambar Bazaar and Mahbubgunj.
The court suggested that the GHMC and poli-ce make a public anno-uncement either through TV or a public address system in the area everyday and warn shopkeepers and others against wrongful use of the pavement.
If anyone were to use the pavement, despite the warning, it would allow the GHMC, with the help of the police, to remove those the encro-achments and to take possession of the articles therein. If the article remained unclaimed and could be disposed, it shall be destroyed.
While disposing off the plea the bench directed the GHMC to report compliance two weeks after the Sankranthi holidays, 2015.
When this petition came up for hearing on Monday, the counsel representing the GHMC urged the court to grant a week’s time to file the report.
Expressing its disapproval, the bench asked the GHMC if it had tak-en into consideration, the suggestions of the court. The counsel replied that the GHMC had taken up a drive to evict encroachers and urged the bench to grant time to file the report.
While granting the time, the bench cautioned the civic body that if the authorities failed to report the compliance by the next date of hearing it would issue suo motu contempt proceedings against the concerned officers.
TS to file FAST counter soon
The Telangana state government on Monday submitted before the Hyderabad High Court that it has been reconsidering its decision to implement the FAST scheme, proposed to extend financial assistance to students whose parents were residents of Telangana as on November 1, 1956.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar was dealing with two petitions, by former ministers of erstwhile united Andhra Pradesh Dokka Manikya Varap-rasada Rao and Pitani Satyanarayana, challenging a GO issued to work out modalities for the scheme and prescribing November 1, 1956 as a requisite for the financial assistance to students. Expressing displeasure, the bench asked the reason as to why a counter affidavit was not filed by the government. The bench said, “On the request of the advocate general, we have granted time for filing of counter, justifying its action in prescri-bing November 1, 1956 as cut-off date for FAST.
It may be mentioned here that Telangana Chief Minister K. Chan-drasekhar Rao annou-nced that the government had decided to scrap FAST and to continue the old fee reimbursement scheme .
A. Sanjiv Kumar, special counsel for the government submitted that in view of new developments, the government was rethinking implementation of the GO relating to FAST scheme. He urged the court to grant time to the government. The bench has adjourned the matter for two weeks.
No intervention in state policy
A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar of the Hyderabad High Court on Monday expressed its disinclination to intervene in the “Shaadi Mubarak” and “Kalyana Lakshmi” schemes introduced by the TS government to extend financial assistance to unmarried girls of minority and SC/ST communities .
The bench was hearing a petition by the All India Backward Classes and Other Backward Classes party, represented by its president T. Danaiah seeking a directive to the TS government to extend financial assistance to unmarried BC and OBC community girls under the schemes.
He submitted that the TS government had issued orders extending financial assistance of '51,000 to every unmarried girl belonging to minority communities at the time of her marriage under similar benefit for girls belonging to SC/ST category.
Mr Danaiah said that the government had not extended the same benefit to the BC and OBC girls and urged the court to direct the government to extend the benefit.
While dismissing the plea, the bench made it clear that it would not intervene as it was policy matter of the government.
HC asks for TS stand on Aruna
A division bench comprising Justice Dilip B. Bhosale and Justice R. Ramalingeswara Rao on Monday directed the TS government to file counter affidavit in a PIL seeking action against the family of former minister D.K. Aruna for their alleged involvement in illegal crushing operations at Mannapuram village of Tharrur mandal in Mahabubnagar district.
The bench was dealing with a PIL by B. Krishna Mohan Reddy, ex-ZPTC member and social worker of Gadwal town, who sought an enquiry into the alleged illegal crushing operations undertaken by former minister’s husband D.K. Bharatha Simha Reddy and daughter D.K. Snigdha Reddy in the name of Ms Road Tech private limited and for diversion of PDS keros-ene for their machines.
The petitioner’s counsel alleged that the minister’s family , had been misusing lease rights by extending crushing ope-rations in 20 hectare of land though permission obtained was meant for one hectare of land only.
