‘Is This Respect for Women MLAs?’: HC Raps Govt on Police Excesses, Reserves Order

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Tuesday reserved its decision in an interim application filed by the state government seeking vacation of the court’s orders passed a day prior directing the DGP to take action against police staff for alleged excesses while preventing BRS legislators from entry the Assembly.

However, Justice T. Madhavi Devi, during the hearing, expressed concern over allegations that a woman legislator’s sari was pulled and another was held by the neck. “Is this the respect being shown to women, particularly women legislators,” the judge asked Advocate-General A. Sudarshan Reddy, who appeared for the state. She pointed out that the women legislators were neither wearing T-shirts displaying slogans nor carrying posters or placards, which was the stated reason for stopping the legislators.

The court had on Monday found fault with the police action and observed that they had no role in obstructing legislators from entering the Assembly, as that authority rested with the Speaker. Challenging these directions, the state moved the interim application seeking their vacation. The Advocate General contended that the observations and directions of the court could have an impact on the discharge of police duties.

The A-G submitted that the police had acted on the instructions of the DGP, who had received directions from the Speaker’s office to restrain legislators who were violating the Assembly’s bulletin and guidelines.

Justice Madhavi Devi, however, sought to know whether the guidelines had been issued — before or after the incident. She also asked when the Speaker’s office had communicated its instructions to the DGP.

The A-G submitted that the BRS legislators had violated the guidelines by wearing T-shirts carrying messages against the government and entering the Assembly premises while raising slogans, which was prohibited. He contended that the legislators had been issued vehicle-entry passes and were expected to enter through the designated vehicles, but instead arrived in groups while raising slogans.

Senior counsel Gandra Mohan Rao, appearing for the BRS Legislature Party, disputed the state’s version and questioned the authenticity and timing of a communication purportedly issued by the Assembly Marshal.

He submitted that a legislator had reached the Assembly premises at around 9.30 am wearing a black T-shirt carrying certain slogans and was stopped at the gate. “Where was the Marshal’s letter at that time,” he asked. He argued that the communication had been created after the court passed its orders during the lunch motion hearing.

Senior counsel maintained that the Assembly Speaker and the Assembly’s marshals alone were competent to enforce the rules governing the conduct of legislators within the Assembly premises. He argued that if the police were permitted to decide whether or not a legislator had violated the Speaker’s directions or the Assembly bulletin, it could seriously undermine the independence of legislators.

“If this power is given to the police, no legislature will be free. It will become a police raj,” he submitted.

Senior counsel Mohan Rao pointed out that the state’s affidavit did not refer to the alleged written communication from the Assembly Secretary or Marshal, which was subsequently produced before the court. He said the Assembly bulletin merely prohibited members from shouting slogans, distributing pamphlets or displaying material unconnected with official Assembly business.

Beyond Gender Binary: HC Orders Cops to Accept Transgender Job Applications

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Tuesday directed the State Level Police Recruitment Board (TSLPRB) to accept applications from transgender persons aspiring to join the police force as constables and sub-inspectors, holding that they could not be shut out of the recruitment process merely because the online application portal followed a binary classification of gender.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohinuddin issued the interim order while hearing a writ petition filed by Devath Tanu Sri and three others challenging the classification of gender as only male or female in the online recruitment portal. The petitioners contended that forcing transgender applicants to choose either “male” or “female” at the threshold of the recruitment process was not only contrary to law but also compelled them to make a false declaration regarding their gender identity.

The Chief Justice questioned the state government why it had not issued guidelines or appropriate directions to various departments to move away from the stereotypical binary classification of gender and adopt a more inclusive approach while dealing with transgender persons.

Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the exclusion of transgender persons from the recruitment process was arbitrary and unconstitutional. He referred to the recommendations of the Telangana Commission for Backward Classes, which had recommended horizontal reservation for transgender persons across different social categories.

The petitioners have challenged recruitment notifications Nos.189 and 225, dated July 20, and a supplementary notification dated August 15, 2026, issued by the recruitment board. They have also questioned Rules 22 and 22-A of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996, insofar as they allegedly exclude transgender persons from consideration.

The petitioners sought directions to provide horizontal reservation for transgender persons across SC, ST, BC, EWS communities and open categories in accordance with the recommendations of the Backward Classes Commission. They also sought permission to participate in all stages of the recruitment process and consideration of their candidature for appointment if they otherwise meet the eligibility criteria.

C. Rajashekar Reddy, standing counsel for Police Recruitment Board, informed the court that the last date for submitting applications had been extended up to September 16. The court directed the board to receive physical applications from the transgender persons and duly acknowledge them, if the online portal did not permit them to submit their applications because of the binary gender classification. The court adjourned the matter to September 16, by which date the state has to file counters.