HC Directs Personal Appearance Of AV Ranganath, TK Sreedevi And Others In Contempt Case

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court on Friday initiated contempt proceedings against municipal administration and urban development principal secretary T.K. Sreedevi, HYDRAA commissioner A.V. Ranganath, the Sangareddy district collector R.D. Madhavi and other revenue authorities over the alleged wilful violation of its directions by interfering with private land and demolishing existing structures at Ailapur in the district.

Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy also issued Form-I contempt notices to joint collector Ravi, the district panchayat officer, the revenue divisional officer and the tahsildar, directing them to appear in person on December 5. As the then district collector had been transferred, the court directed the contempt petitioner to implead the incumbent officer.

Justice Bhaskar Reddy was dealing with a contempt case filed by M.A. Shareef alleging that the officials had deliberately violated the interim order passed by the High Court on September 25, 2024. The petitioner had approached the court claiming ownership and possession of 36.37 acres spread across Survey No.s 165 to 175, 212 and 213 at Ailapur, Ameenpur mandal. He relied on registered sale deeds dating back to 1959 and pattadar passbooks in support of his claim.

Shareef had earlier instituted a civil suit before the V Additional District Judge, Medak, at Sangareddy, which was decreed on April 1, 2009, declaring him the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land. An appeal, A.S. No. 520 of 2010, challenging the decree, is pending before the High Court. With the HYDRAA, revenue and municipal authorities of Sangareddy district demolishing a farmhouse and other constructions on the land, Shareef had approached the High Court in 2024.

Considering his request in writ petition, the High Court had on September 25, 2024, noted that the authorities had not issued notices to the petitioner and that a civil court had declared him the owner and possessor of the land. It directed the HYDRAA, municipal and revenue authorities to not take coercive action for removal of the existing constructions pending further orders. The court also directed the authorities to follow due procedure in accordance with law if any of the constructions were found to be within the full tank level (FTL) area.

The petitioner filed a contempt case alleging that despite the court orders in 2024, that HYDRAA and revenue officials subsequently the property. The authorities justified the operation on the ground that they were reclaiming more than 800 acres of government land allegedly under encroachment.

In the contempt proceedings, Deepak Misra, counsel for the petitioner contended that the demolition was undertaken in deliberate disregard of the judicial protection granted to Shareef. He alleged that the officials had acted in violation of both the High Court's interim order and the Supreme Court's directions.

Justice Bhaskar Reddy held that the officers had prima facie failed to comply with the judicial directions and that their conduct amounted to wilful disobedience.

HC declined to lift suspension of food licence of Pulla Reddy Sweets

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court has declined to lift the suspension of the food business licence of Pulla Reddy Sweets’ Sanathnagar branch, taking note of continuing deficiencies in the manufacturing unit despite a re-inspection by food safety officials.

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar was hearing a petition filed by G. Pulla Reddy Sweets, represented by its authorised representative Raghava Reddy, challenging the proceedings issued by the food safety designated officer, Khairatabad zone, Hyderabad, dated October 28. The proceedings had suspended the establishment's FSSAI licence citing alleged deficiencies and violations noticed during an inspection of its manufacturing premises at Sanathnagar here.

The matter was once again heard on Friday. Pursuant to the court’s earlier directions, officials re-inspected the manufacturing premises and submitted a report to the court, which pointed out that several deficiencies continued to persist, although some violations had been rectified. The report specifically recorded the presence of cobwebs, inadequate drainage in the khoya production unit and accumulation of milk residue along the corners of walls, creating conditions conducive to insect infestation and possible contamination.

Taking note of the inspection report and the government’s submissions, the judge declined to interfere with the suspension of the licence and adjourned the matter to November 18.

SC declines to interfere with BCI stay on Telangana Bar Council committees

Hyderabad:The Supreme Court on Friday declined to intervene in the Bar Council of India’s decision to stay the constitution of various committees by the newly elected Bar Council of Telangana, holding that statutory committees must be constituted strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Advocates Act.

A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana directed the Telangana Bar Council to conduct fresh elections to the statutory committees in accordance with the law. The bench also allowed the stay imposed by the BCI on the committees constituted through nomination.

Senior counsel Dama Seshadri Naidu, appearing for the Telangana Bar Council, gave an undertaking that the nominated committees would be discontinued and fresh elections conducted in accordance with the statutory rules. Taking note of the undertaking, the Supreme Court disposed of the petition seeking to set aside the BCI chairman’s order.

The dispute arose after Telangana Bar Council vice-chairman Venkat Yadav Chalakani and members Ponnam Ashok Goud, Rohini Smitha C., K. Sunil Goud and M.A.K. Mukheed approached the BCI challenging the constitution of various committees by the State Bar Council chairman. They alleged that committees, including the executive, enrolment and disciplinary committees, had been constituted through nominations without conducting the mandatory elections or following the procedure for co-option under the Advocates Act, 1961. They also alleged that 10 designated members had not been consulted.

Acting on their appeals, BCI chairman Manan Kumar Mishra stayed the constitution of the committees. The Telangana Bar Council approached the Supreme Court challenging the stay, contending that the BCI chairman had acted unilaterally and without consulting the other members of the BCI. It argued that the order had been passed without issuing notice or providing an opportunity of hearing, in violation of the principles of natural justice.

HC questions CBSE over private schools forcing costly non-NCERT books

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court on Friday questioned the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) over the action taken against affiliated private schools allegedly compelling students to use textbooks published by private publishers instead of prescribed NCERT books and forcing parents to purchase expensive study material.

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar sought to know what measures the board had taken to prevent such practices and ensure compliance with its affiliation bye-laws and the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009. The court also sought clarity on the enforcement of regulatory mechanisms, including School Management Committees (SMCs), School Governing Bodies (SGBs) and Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs), in private schools.

The judge was hearing a writ petition filed by Bolleddu Joshua, a government employee and resident of Borabanda, who alleged that CBSE-affiliated schools were prescribing costly books published by private agencies in violation of the prescribed NCERT curriculum. The petition particularly referred to Don Bosco High School.

The petitioner contended that the CBSE had failed to act on his earlier complaints regarding the alleged violations. He sought directions to the board to ensure that affiliated schools adhere to the NCERT syllabus and maintain transparency in the collection of fees, prescription of textbooks and other academic and administrative practices.

Vijay Gopal, counsel for the petitioner, also sought enforcement of statutory provisions requiring schools to constitute school management committees and parent-teachers associations in accordance with the applicable state education rules and CBSE regulations. He further sought transparency in the publication of annual accounts and fee structures.

The petition sought a declaration that the CBSE's alleged failure to act on the complaints was illegal and negligent and also sought a penalty of `10 lakh against the board. The court adjourned the matter to November 12 for further hearing.

KVP Red corner Notice- HC directs Centre, Telangana government to file counters

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court on Friday directed the Centre and the Telangana governments to file their counter-affidavits explaining their stand on the Interpol red corner notice (RCN) and provisional arrest warrant (PAW) issued against former MP K.V.P. Ramachandra Rao in connection with the alleged titanium scam. The court also directed Rao’s counsel to furnish records relating to the case to government counsels to enable them to prepare their responses.

Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy was hearing a petition filed by Rao in April 2014, seeking to restrain the authorities from taking further action on the RNC and the PAW issued against him in connection with the alleged conspiracy surrounding a memorandum of understanding signed by the then government with Switzerland-based Bowli Trade AG for a titanium project. Justice Reddy adjourned the matter to November 25.

The petitioner's challenge related to the proceedings initiated by the US authorities in connection with allegations that bribes amounting to $18.5 million were paid to officials of the Central and state governments to secure permissions for the project. The case was registered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) before the US District Court in Northern Illinois.

Senior counsel N. Hemendranath Reddy, appearing for Rao, submitted that the Central and State governments had not filed their responses, except the CBI. He argued that the CBI had no substantive role in the matter and that the responsibility to explain the legal and administrative basis for the RCN rested with the Union government.

He pointed out that the Union external affairs ministry and the Union home ministry had also been arrayed as respondents and that their responses were necessary for adjudicating the challenge. He submitted that the matter directly concerned the fundamental rights of the petitioner and alleged that the case had been initiated for political reasons.

T. Srujan Kumar Reddy, counsel for the CBI, submitted that the RCN had been issued in connection with the proceedings initiated in the United States. He clarified that the CBI had a limited role in the matter and was only an implementing agency, with no direct involvement in the issuance of the notice.