New Plea Against Challan Collection
The petitioner has approached the court separately on the issue of penalties levied by the traffic police.
Hyderabad: Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the police and others in a writ plea questioning the authority of the traffic police to stop vehicles for pending challans and insisting on payment of same. The judge was hearing a writ petition filed by V. Raghavendra Chary.
The petitioner has approached the court separately on the issue of penalties levied by the traffic police. In the present petition, it was contended that the traffic police could not detain a motorist on the ground of unpaid challans and only a court of law could decide penalty or imprisonment in terms of Rule 167 (Procedure for issuance and payment of challan) and Rule 167A (Electronic monitoring and enforcement of safety) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, read with Section 208 (Summary disposal of cases) of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was contended that the police could neither compound offences punishable with imprisonment, nor could they demand payment of challans on the spot. It was argued that use of mobile applications without valid authorisation from the designated state authority was illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioner challenged the alleged illegal detention of his vehicle on multiple dates and assailed a government order issued on 18.08.2011 by the transport, roads & buildings department arguing that compelling citizens to clear pending challans on the roadside was contrary to the Motor Vehicles Act and violative of the doctrine of repugnancy.
PIL says 14,935 police posts vacant
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court took on file a public interest litigation challenging alleged large-scale vacancies in the police department and their impact on law and order. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and G.M. Mohiuddin was hearing the PIL filed by Keethineedi Akhil Sri Guru Teja challenging the inaction of the state authorities in filling up sanctioned posts in the police department. Counsel for the petitioner, Barkat Ali Khan, contended that failure of the authorities despite of the directions made by the apex court in suo motu proceedings, wherein the court instructed all states to take steps to fill vacant posts in police forces and state armed forces and to monitor the process periodically is illegal and arbitraty.
Counsel contended that due to the absence of a structured and time-bound recruitment mechanism, vacancies had accumulated to nearly 14,935, including 11,713 constable posts and 739 sub-inspector posts. He contended that the acute manpower shortage has resulted in overburdening of the existing workforce, affecting law and order operations, delaying investigations, and ultimately impacting public safety. The panel directed the state authorities to file a counter affidavit setting out the exact number of vacancies in the police department, the recruitment processes initiated, if any, and the stages at which such processes stood. The panel also directed the Telangana Public Service Commission to file an affidavit placing relevant details on record.
HC sets aside Tribunal order on RTC staffer
Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao of the Telangana High Court set aside an award passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Warangal in a long-pending service dispute concerning disciplinary action against an APSRTC cleaner. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by the depot manager, APSRTC, Narsampet challenging the tribunal’s 2007 award modifying the punishment imposed on the employee. It was contended that the tribunal intervened despite proven misconduct and despite the employee raising the dispute after an unexplained delay of over 16 years. The record showed that the charges related to the employee leaving night-shift duty without permission in 1988 and failing to sweep several vehicles. A domestic enquiry was conducted and punishment of deferment of one annual increment for two years was imposed in August 1988.
The judge noted that the employee neither appealed nor sought review against the punishment and remained silent for over 16 years before approaching the conciliation machinery. The judge observed that the tribunal failed to consider the abnormal delay and the existence of earlier similar punishments. Holding that such belated claims could not be mechanically entertained merely on the ground that the legislation was beneficial, the judge set aside the tribunal’s award.