Student Challenges Expulsion by ICFAI College

Hyderabad: Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the disciplinary action taken by the ICFAI Foundation for Higher Education (IFHE) against a law student for participating in a protest against alleged adulterated food served in the campus canteen. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Ritik Kumar Dubey challenging the suspension from the department, faculty, library, mess and club, in addition to permanent expulsion from the hostel. The petitioner contended that the action was arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional, besides being violative of his fundamental rights under the Constitution. It was argued that the order suffered from a violation of principles of natural justice, as no fair hearing was provided. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner only participated along with nearly 200 other students in a protest against the adulteration of food served in the campus canteen, and the disciplinary action was a retaliatory measure and the petitioner was being targeted as a scapegoat. The petitioner sought for declaring the orders of both the disciplinary and appellate authorities, as well as the connected proceedings pending before the Students Grievance Redressal Committee, as unlawful and for their setting aside. The judge ordered notices to the vice chancellor of ICFAI and other competent authorities.

2. United Spirits pulled up on labour practices

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court ruled that the misuse of contract labour for perennial work, arbitrary termination and selective regularisation were discriminatory and impermissible. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Vudugula Venkatesh and seven others, who joined between 2008 and 2014 through a labour contractor, alleging that despite working continuously for over a decade, they were denied regularisation as permanent employees, while others were absorbed under successive long-term settlements in United Spirits Limited. They also complained of denial of gratuity, bonus, leave benefits and irregular remittance of ESI contributions. The workers contended that they were retrenched without notice or compensation, in violation of various provisions under the Industrial Disputes Act, and that the company used contract employment as a “camouflage” to avoid regularisation. Some petitioners further alleged discrimination on account of physical disability, invoking the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. While the company, United Spirits Limited, argued that no employer-employee relationship existed and that the workers were engaged only in non-core activities through contractors, the judge found the labour commissioner’s claim of lack of jurisdiction contradictory. Holding that the petitioners established a prima facie case of arbitrary action and procedural irregularities, the judge allowed the writ plea and directed the joint labour commissioner to pass reasoned orders on the workers’ complaint.

3. Plea challenges Group-I excise notification

The Telangana High Court will decide a writ plea challenging the Group-I notification dated February 19, 2024, insofar as it notified 30 vacancies of assistant excise superintendent (excise service), allegedly in excess of the direct recruitment quota prescribed under the Telangana Excise Service Rules. Justice Pulla Karthik was dealing with a writ plea filed by T. Laxman Goud and L. Ramakrishna, prohibition and excise inspectors, who contended that by earmarking more vacancies than permitted for direct recruitment, the authorities denied their legitimate claim for promotion/transfer to the cadre of assistant excise superintendent in due turn. They argued that the action was illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of the Constitution and contrary to the Excise Service Rules. The petitioners sought to declare the notification invalid to the extent of the excess vacancies and to direct the authorities to restrict direct recruitment to 11 posts only, in accordance with the 1961 Rules. The judge ordered notice to the Telangana Public Service Commission and other respondent authorities.

4. HC questions police over early morning visits

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court directed Shankarpally police authorities to proceed in accordance with law in a writ plea alleging early morning visits and interference with the liberty of two residents. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Mohammed Muneer Pasha Qureshi and Mohammed Azeem Pasha Qureshi. The petitioners complained that the Shankarpally police station house officer was summoning them without cause and visiting their residence at 5 am, despite their being on bail in earlier criminal cases. They alleged that police forcefully obtained an undertaking from one of them to produce the other at the station. The state contended that the petitioners were accused in three criminal cases and that bind-over proceedings were proposed. The judge sought justification for police visits at such hours, to which no proper explanation was forthcoming. The judge directed the respondent authorities to strictly act as per the law while proceeding against the petitioners.