Telangana HC Takes Up Janapriya Block Case
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court accepted a writ plea challenging the alleged illegal conversion and sale of the amenities block at the Janapriya Metropolis residential complex in Motinagar, Erragadda.
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court accepted a writ plea challenging the alleged illegal conversion and sale of the amenities block at the Janapriya Metropolis residential complex in Motinagar, Erragadda. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by the Metropolis Flat Owners Welfare Association. The petitioner contended that the developers, Janapriya Engineers Syndicate Pvt. Ltd and S.P. Real Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd, unlawfully converted the amenities block, originally sanctioned for common use, into a commercial complex. The petitioner alleged that the construction deviated from the sanctioned building plan approved by the GHMC, thereby violating the Telangana Apartments (Promotion of Construction and Ownership) Act, the Telangana Building Rules and constitutional protections. The petitioner accused municipal officials of inaction, alleging that they failed to take necessary steps to prevent or stop the illegal construction and commercialisation of the common area. Besides, the petitioner challenged the registration of sale deeds related to the amenities block by the registration department, arguing that such transactions stood in direct contravention of the law and a government memo dated August 26, 2020. The High Court earlier granted an interim order restraining the sale and third-party leasing of the amenities block in the Janapriya Metropolis and Classic Homes residential complex and directed the commissioner and IG of registration and stamps not to entertain any registration of sale deeds concerning the amenities block. Counsel for the unofficial respondents contended that the building remained unused for a long period and significant investments had gone into it. The petitioners sought time in the matter. The judge posted the matter after one week.
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court directed that no coercive steps be taken against a Hyderabad-based solar power company for recovery of deviation charges, on the condition that the company deposit 25 per cent of the demand within four weeks. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice P. Sam Koshy was hearing a writ plea filed by the Meenakshi Malkapur Power Private Limited, challenging the vires of Regulation 15 of the Telangana Electricity Regulatory Commission (Forecasting, Scheduling, Deviation Settlement and Related Matters for Solar and Wind Generation Sources) Regulations, 2018, and Clause 11 of its procedural framework. The petitioner assailed the provisions as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The company also challenged invoices raised by the Transmission Corporation of Telangana (TG Transco) towards deviation settlement charges for the months of April and May 2023. It would contend that the said regulation and procedural clause are ultra vires and impose an unfair burden on solar power generators. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that in two similar writ pleas, the Telangana High Court granted interim protection subject to a 50 per cent deposit. Those orders were modified by the Supreme Court in SLPs, permitting a 25 per cent deposit instead. The petitioner sought parity in the present case. The panel accepted the submission and passed an interim order directing the petitioner to deposit 25 per cent of the deviation charges within four weeks and ordered that no coercive steps be taken in the meantime. The matter is posted for further hearing.
3. Father moves HC to retake daughter
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea filed by a father seeking the release of his two-year-old daughter from a child protection centre in Nalgonda district. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Muthineni Venakanna, who alleged that his minor daughter was detained by the respondent authorities without justification or due process. The petitioner contended that the child, aged about two years, was being kept in isolation within the centre without the care and affection of her parents and grandparents, resulting in severe psychological trauma and depression. It was the grievance of the petitioner that despite repeated requests, the authorities, including the district welfare and child protection officers and officials of the child welfare committee, failed to hand over custody of the child, thereby violating the child's and the petitioner’s fundamental rights under the Constitution. The petitioner further contends that neither he nor his family has been accused of any misconduct warranting such custodial separation. The matter is posted for further hearing.
4. Pension delayed, kin allege red tape
Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea complaining of the prolonged pendency of disciplinary proceedings against a retired deputy director of the tribal welfare department. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Gaffar Bhanu, legal representative of the late M.A. Rasheed, who retired from service in May 2016. The petitioner contended that multiple charge memos were issued in 2010, 2011 and 2014, with one memo communicated as late as 2018, were in gross violation of the Revised Pension Rules. It is argued that no final orders have been passed even eight years after retirement. It is the petitioner’s case that the delay in concluding the disciplinary proceedings was arbitrary and vitiated the process, particularly in light of the legal position that proceedings post-retirement must be concluded within a reasonable period. The petitioner would also allege that this prolonged inaction has led to withholding of retirement benefits, including pension and gratuity, causing undue hardship. The petitioner is seeking the release of the withheld retirement benefits along with interest at 24 per cent per annum from the date of retirement. The judge directed the state to file its response.