Centre: No role in judges’ appointment on dispute between AP, Telangana govts

Deccan Chronicle.

Nation, Current Affairs

Hyderabad HC has been recruiting district and civil judges pursuant to notifications issued in accordance with AP judicial service rules.

The TS government and Telangana advocates had opposed the ongoing recruitments and had moved petitions contending that since the TS had already framed its own judicial rules.

Hyderabad: The Union of India on Thursday said it had no role to play in the ongoing dispute between AP and TS governments regarding recruitment of district judges and junior civil judges.

The Hyderabad High Court, which is the common High Court for both states, has been recruiting district and junior civil judges pursuant to notifications issued in accordance with the AP judicial service rules.

The TS government and Telangana advocates had opposed the ongoing recruitments and had moved petitions contending that since the TS had already framed its own judicial rules, recruitments pertaining to the state must be done in accordance to the state’s judicial rules and not AP judicial rules.

Additional solicitor-general K.M. Natraj, appearing before a division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale and Justice S.V. Bhatt, submitted that the Centre had no role to play in the matter and it was for both the states and the High Court to take a decision.

He said that the High Court has to take a decision on division of subordinate judiciary since the bifurcation of the state has been done and if the High Court sent a proposal for division of staff, then the Centre would deal with it as per Section 77 of the AP Reorganisation Act 2014.

S. Satyam Reddy, senior counsel and petitioner as a party in person said that the High Court had failed to represent the case properly before the Supreme Court and as a result of that an order was passed by the Apex Court which, if implemented, would lead to further problems.

Senior counsel G. Vidya Sagar said that the TS government had the power to make its own judicial rules and that the High Court had to make appointments for the two states in tune with the judicial rules of the respective states.

The Bench posted the case to March 4 for hearing the contentions of the TS A-G and those of the HC counsel.

Court orders complaint of perjury on Sujana firm
The XI Additional Chief Judge of the City Civil Courts of Hyderabad has directed the Chief Ministerial Officer of the court to lodge a complaint of perjury against Sujana Universal Industries Ltd MD G. Srinivasa Raju.

The Additional Chief Judge was dealing with an application moved by the Mauritius Commercial Bank alleging that the MD has committed perjury by filing a false affidavit, which attracts charges under IPC Sections 91,193,199,200 and 206.

The bank had earlier moved a complaint before the court, alleging that the board of directors of Sujana Universal Industries had committed various offences under the IPC, including cheating, dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property to prevent distribution among creditors, despite court orders to disclose details of all its assets, including bank accounts.

Counsel for the bank Sanjeev Kumar said, “The court, after conducting a preliminary inquiry, formed the opinion that it was expedient in the interest of justice that a detailed inquiry should be made into the offence of perjury against Srinivasa Raju. Accordingly, the court directed the Chief Ministerial Officer to lodge a complaint before the appropriate magistrate having jurisdiction”.

Read more...