A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court, comprising acting Chief Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Justice Namavarapu Rajeswar Rao, directed the state revenue department to explain its stance in detail regarding allotment of land for establishment of a hostel, residential school and old-age home on payment of Rs one per acre in Budvel village. The panel sought the information in a public interest litigation filed by K. Koteshwarao challenging an order of the government made in 2018 in favour of Raja Bahadur Venkata Rama Reddy Educational Society for establishment of the three on payment of 'one per acre at Budvel village. Counsel for the petitioner Chikudu Prabhaker contended that the action of the government was unfair, unlawful and a mockery of various Supreme Court judgments with reference to land allotment. The petitioner also sought return of the land to the government. The government is now required to make its detailed stand by August 4.
Hearing on HRC Chairman adjourned
The said bench heard a PIL for filling up of the vacant Telangana State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) chairperson post. The petition has been filed by Adnan Mahmood, a practicing advocate, seeking for appointment of the panel’s entire body. The petitioner also urged the court for an action plan or scheme to ensure that the posts are filled up. It is contended that the said post is a guarantee against violation of human rights and if the commission is itself not constituted it reflects poorly on the state of human rights in Telangana. The matter has been adjourned to August 4 for further hearing.
HC hears case of custodial death in Medak PS
The bench deferred a suo moto petition on another incident of custodial death. The court earlier had taken up a writ petition based on a news report regarding the death of an accused person while in police custody. A letter was issued to call for remarks and records from the SI, Medak, relating to the custodial death of Mohammed Qadeer, who was aged about 35 years. A daily-wage earner, the victim was detained in Medak police station on January 27. Reportedly, the victim was interrogated for allegedly snatching a chain from a woman. It is alleged that the victim was tortured and was subject to third-degree treatment while he was in police custody. Thereafter, he was rushed to the hospital where his health condition deteriorated. He died in Gandhi hospital on February 16. The matter has been adjourned to August 4 for further hearing.
HC junks habeas corpus against woman
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court, comprising Justice K. Lakshman and P. Shree Sudha on Friday rejected a plea by the daughter and parents of Nagala Ramya to trace the detenue in a habeas corpus writ petition. The court observed that she had allegedly escaped from her house around midnight on June 13 unable to bear the harassment of her husband. She approached one of her relatives who helped her in moving to a safer shelter. As the police were threatening her by following her she approached the court with a request to stop the police harassment. Thereafter the court took on file the present habeas corpus petition filed by Ramya’s daughter N. Nikita claiming that she has been missing and police were unable to know her whereabouts. On earlier occasions the court interacted with Ramya through video conference after which the court observed that she had left the house on her own will and she was not being forcibly detained by anyone. The court while allowing the plea directed police authorities not to interfere with the personal liberty of Ramya and her relatives. It also observed that they can seek police protection if necessary.
DFO and GHMC chief get another chance to avoid contempt proceedings
Justice J. Sreenivasa Rao of the Telangana High Court granted a last opportunity to divisional forest range officer M. Joshi and the commissioner of GHMC Lokesh Kumar in a contempt filed by Radha Devi Mandhana. The manner in which bureaucrats of different wings were volleying responsibility did not amuse the court. Earlier, the judge directed the government officials to consider the representation of the petitioner and take appropriate steps for felling of a tree that is damaging the petitioner’s house. As the order was not complied with despite directions of the court, the contempt was filed. The government pleader, appearing for GHMC, contended that they have given NOC and the felling of the tree is not under their purview, and that the forest department has to consider the same. The government pleader for the forest officials stated that they have already accorded the permission for felling of the tree. Furthermore, they also contended that as the tree was on the footpath and falls under GHMC limits and the action is also to be taken by them as per the orders of the court upon payment of the necessary charges. The court adjourned the matter to next week, stating if the order is not complied with, the judge would pass the orders in the presence of the contemnors.
