Telangana High Court Takes Up Plea of SCR Pensioner

Hyderabad:A division bench of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, which dismissed the plea of a retired railway employee on the ground of delay and laches. The bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin is hearing a writ plea filed by Syed Mohsin, a retired technician grade-I from South Central Railway (SCR), Lalaguda. The petitioner contended that the tribunal erred in rejecting his plea for refund of `96,959 recovered from his retirement benefits without affording him an opportunity of hearing. He contended that the recovery, made towards alleged excess leave salary drawn years earlier, was impermissible after retirement and contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court and the department of personnel and training’s office memorandum of March 2016. He argued that the tribunal dismissed his case solely on technical grounds without considering settled principles. Before the tribunal, the SCR authorities contended that the recovery had been effected in 2012 based on audit objections and that the applicant approached the tribunal after an inordinate delay of more than 10 years. Accepting this contention, the tribunal dismissed the original application holding that the claim was barred by limitation and laches, and that there was no justification for entertaining the matter at such a belated stage. After hearing the petitioner’s counsel, the bench directed the respondents to file their response in the writ plea.

HC junks challenge to voters list

Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ plea challenging the publication of the final list of mandal parishad territorial constituencies (MPTCs) in Pedda Adiserlapally (PA Pally) mandal, Nalgonda district. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Palle Satyanarayana and others. The petitioners questioned the action of the District Election Authority in issuing the final notification of February without proper publication of the draft list, wide publicity, or due consideration of objections, allegedly in violation of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act and government memo of January 2025. The respondents contended that the delimitation was carried out in accordance with the Act, maintaining population balance between Balaji Nagar MPTC (4,241) and PA Pally MPTC (4,118), and that objections, including one from the local MLA, were duly considered. Finding that the draft list was displayed for inspection and that no substantial procedural irregularity or prejudice was shown, the judge held there was no ground to interfere. The judge accordingly dismissed the writ plea.

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court directed Banjara Hills police to follow due procedure in investigating a case relating to creation of a fake Instagram profile. The judge dealt with a writ plea filed by Akbar Alam. The petitioner alleged that the police were harassing him and compelling him to appear at the police station without notice or any registered case and that he was detained without formal charges. The government pleader informed the judge that a woman lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioner and another person had created an online account using her photographs and uploaded objectionable content. Based on her complaint, an FIR was registered for offences of stalking and criminal intimidation and for violation of privacy as well as publishing or transmitting material containing sexually explicit acts, etc., in electronic form under the Information Technology Act, 2000. The government contended that the petitioner was merely called to the police station in connection with the investigation of this FIR and that, instead of cooperating with the process, he had approached the court by filing the writ plea. The judge disposed of the writ plea by directing the police to proceed in accordance with law and ensure due process. The judge also directed the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation.

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court upheld the decision of the Telangana Public Service Commission’s (TGPSC) decision to reject the candidature of a BPharm graduate for the post of forest section officer, holding that the degree was not equivalent to the prescribed qualification and that courts could not substitute the opinion of academic experts in such matters. Justice Bheemapaka dismissed a writ petition filed by Ramesh Kumar, who applied to a notification issued by TGPSC in August 2017, which required a Bachelor’s degree in specified subjects such as botany, forestry, horticulture, etc., or an equivalent qualification. Claiming that his BPharm degree included substantial study of chemistry, the petitioner argued that it should be treated as equivalent to a Bachelor’s degree in chemistry. The petitioner was provisionally allowed to write the examination and attend certificate verification. However, TGPSC later rejected his candidature on the ground of non-fulfilment of the prescribed educational qualification. To resolve multiple such claims, TGPSC sought clarification from the Telangana Council of Higher Education (TGCHE), which formed a subject expert committee comprising deans and academic heads from Osmania University, and other institutions. After assessing the syllabus and course structure, the committee concluded that the BPharmacy degree could not be considered equivalent to any of the prescribed degrees for the FSO post. While dismissing the writ petition, Justice Bheemapaka observed: “The opinion of subject experts cannot be substituted by judicial interpretation, particularly in matters involving academic standards.”