Village Merger With Chevella Municipality Challenged
Food suppliers to SW Educational institutions move HC for bills
Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea challenging a government order on the merger of Urella with the Chevalla municipality. The panel comprising Aparesh Kumar Singh and G.M. Mohiuddin was hearing a writ petition filed by Suniganti Vittalaiah, deputy sarpanch of Urella who contended that the impugned merger was illegal and unsustainable. Counsel for the petitioner contended that under the Municipalities Act, a village can be included within municipal limits only if it fell within a three-kilometre radius and that the mandatory statutory procedure prescribed for such inclusion had not been followed in notifying the village as a part of Chevella municipality. He argued that no notification was issued either for constituting a gram panchayat or for initiating the process of merger, despite repeated representations made by the villagers and local representatives. He contended that Urella was a hamlet with a population of around 3,000 and would lose its independent status and be reduced to a mere municipal ward if the impugned merger is allowed to stand. The panel directed the state to file its counter justifying the issuance of the impugned government order and posted the matter for further hearing.
2. Food suppliers to SW Educational institutions move HC for bills
Justice Renuka Yara of the Telangana High Court directed the state to consider the claim of long-pending bills payable to traders supplying social welfare educational institutions. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by G. Ashok and four traders from Nagarkurnool district, engaged in supplying vegetables, fruits, milk and other eatables to the institutions. It was the case of the petitioners that despite having supplied provisions during the period from March to September 2019, their bills amounting to about ₹15.59 lakh were not cleared by the authorities. It was contended that several representations were submitted to the officials seeking release of the pending amounts, however, the respondent authorities failed to take any action or pass orders on the same. Justice Renuka Yara disposed of the writ petition directing respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners addressed to the Telangana Social Welfare Residential School, Lingala, Nagarkurnool district, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks.
3. Women's Commission summons to lady advocate stayed by HC
Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court stayed proceedings of State Commission for Women and Child Welfare summoning an advocate over a complaint filed by her mother in a matrimonial matter. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by a woman advocate, assailing the proceedings whereby the commission directed the station house officer to produce her before it on 27.01.2026. It was argued that the complaint before the Women’s Commission was lodged by the petitioner’s mother solely on the ground that the petitioner had married against her will, and that the commission lacked jurisdiction to summon the petitioner in such circumstances. The summons she said amounted to misuse of statutory powers by the Womens Commission. The judge stayed all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order until due process of notice is followed and posted the matter for further hearing.
4. Petitioner has power of choice, says HC
Justice E.V. Venugopal of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday observed that the Registry of the High Court cannot take objection to the array of parties chosen by the writ petitioner. The judge overruled objections in this regard raised by the Registry, where an additional public prosecutor was arrayed as a party in a writ petition. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Sothuku Rajaiah challenging the police in not acting on the representation and not filing a criminal petition in the ongoing proceedings, to call for the nodal officer of the telecom company to produce call data and tower location of the accused for the intervening night when a murder took place to secure retirement and dependent employment benefits of the deceased. After hearing senior counsel, the judge took on file a judgment of the apex court that echoed the age-old theory that the petitioner was the dominus litis, the master of the suit, and had the right to choose the array of parties. The judge directed the Registry to take necessary steps to ensure implementation of a recent verdict of the Supreme Court in this regard.