Writ against Google for trial by the media

Powers and actions of Waqf board questioned

The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ appeal challenging the Waqf board’s authority to appoint a managing committee when a mutawalli (custodian) is already in place. A two-judge panel, comprising acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara, heard the appeal concerning the formation of a managing committee for Edgah Kalabgore, Sangareddy. The writ appeal was filed by Mohammed Abdul Satta, who argued that the proceedings issued by the board in June 2023 were illegal and violated the principles of natural justice. The petitioner contended that he was managing Waqf property since 2012 devoid of any complaints and that the committee’s formation was influenced by vested interests without giving him an opportunity to present his case. The petitioner contended that the board lacked the authority to appoint a managing committee when a mutawalli was still in charge, citing legal precedents which state that a committee can be formed only in the absence of a mutawalli. The single judge had earlier dismissed the writ plea, ruling that the case involved disputed questions of fact that could not be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution. The judge emphasized that the Wakf tribunal was the appropriate forum for such matters and advised the petitioner to seek legal remedies there. In the writ appeal, the appellant argued that the ruling of the single judge contradicted Supreme Court precedents, including those that allow writ petitions in cases pertaining to violations of fundamental rights, procedural irregularities or lack of jurisdiction. However, the panel upheld the order passed by the single judge in the writ plea and dismissed the writ appeal, reaffirming that the Wakf tribunal was the proper forum for resolving such disputes.

HC refuses to interfere with punishment to errant RTC conductor

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court held that judicial review is limited to assessing the fairness of the decision-making process rather than re-evaluating the evidence itself. This observation came while dealing with a writ plea challenging the decision of the labour court concerning a former conductor of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TGSRTC), who was removed from service over allegations of ticketing irregularities. The judge dealt with a writ plea filed by M.A. Rub, a 49-year-old ex-conductor, who joined the corporation in April 1991 and was regularised two years later. He was removed from service on October 24, 2017, following allegations that he issued luggage tickets instead of passenger tickets while conducting an inter-state bus service from Hyderabad to Raichur. The labour court upheld the findings of the disciplinary inquiry but modified the punishment from removal to compulsory retirement. The petitioner argued had the ticketing error was unintentional and resulted from pressing the wrong key on the TIMS keyboard. However, the corporation contended that the petitioner had a history of misconduct, including prior disciplinary instances, deferrals of increments, and suspensions for similar violations. The judge held that the labour court had appropriately evaluated the evidence and determined that the punishment of compulsory retirement was justified. “The Labour Court, in light of the petitioner’s long service and the nature of the misconduct, found compulsory retirement to be a proportionate response,” the judge noted, rejecting the petitioner’s plea for reinstatement with full benefits. While dismissing the writ plea, the judge held that the petitioner stands retired from service with all benefits applicable to retiring employees.

HC directs action against illegal parking at Gayatri gardens

Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court directed Dundigal municipality to take necessary action against alleged illegal encroachments and unauthorised parking in Gayathri Gardens GPR layout at Medchal. The judge dealt with a writ plea filed by a registered association, representing plot owners, seeking to declare the inaction of the authorities despite representations submitted between November and December 2022 as illegal and arbitrary. The association accused an unofficial respondent, of unlawfully using open spaces in the layout for commercial parking and allowing unauthorized constructions. The petitioners claimed that open spaces meant for residents were being misused for parking heavy vehicles, with parking fees being collected from them illegally. They also alleged unauthorised structures and encroachments, causing harassment and obstruction to lawful property owners. In spite of repeated complaints to the municipality and police, no action had been taken. The Dundigal municipality and HMDA countered the claims, stating that no illegal construction was found upon inspection and that parking activities were occurring on private land and not on designated open spaces. It was also argued that any action regarding unauthorised parking would need police intervention. However, the judge noted discrepancies in these responses and pointed out that the municipality had not confirmed whether the unofficial respondent had proper authorization for the parking operations. The judge noted the existence of multiple ongoing civil disputes, including ownership claims and appeals related to the land in question. After perusing the material on record, the judge disposed of the writ plea directing the Dundigal municipality to review the petitioners' complaints and inspect the site. The judge further instructed the authorities to verify whether the unofficial respondents have valid permissions for commercial parking and construction of structures within three months.