HC Grants Relief To School, Suspends DEO Order
Justice Suddala Chalapathi Rao of the Telangana High Court, sitting in vacation court, granted interim relief to M/s Nobel School, Kapra, in Medchal-Malkajgiri district by suspending proceedings issued by the district educational officer (DEO) that effectively terminated recognition of the institution and restrained its admissions for the 2026-27 academic year.
Hyderabad: Justice Suddala Chalapathi Rao of the Telangana High Court, sitting in vacation court, granted interim relief to M/s Nobel School, Kapra, in Medchal-Malkajgiri district by suspending proceedings issued by the district educational officer (DEO) that effectively terminated recognition of the institution and restrained its admissions for the 2026-27 academic year. The writ petition was filed by the school challenging the proceedings dated May 4 directing it to obtain a fire NOC, GHMC occupancy certificate and traffic NOC. The petitioner contended that the impugned proceedings were arbitrary, illegal and issued without considering that the recognition was already granted to the school up to the year 2034. It was further argued that the authorities failed to assign valid reasons before taking action affecting the functioning of the institution and admissions for the academic year 2026-27. Upon hearing the matter, the judge held that the recognition granted to the petitioner school remained valid and that the authorities proceeded to pass the impugned order without properly considering the relevant circumstances. The Court prima facie held that a fire NOC was not mandatory where the building height was below 15 metres in height under the applicable government norms. With regard to the occupancy certificate and traffic NOC, the judge observed that reasonable time ought to have been granted to the institution for compliance. Accordingly, the Court suspended the impugned proceedings subject to the school producing the occupancy certificate and traffic NOC within three months. The Court further directed the authorities to inspect the institution upon submission of the certificates and take further action in accordance with law. The court further directed the respondents to file their responses in the matter.
HYDRAA told to hear plea
Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court, sitting in vacation court, directed the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) and the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) to consider a representation submitted by a group of plot owners from Chandanagar village in Ranga Reddy district following allegations of interference with their possession and excavation work on their land. The judge was hearing a writ petition filed by B. Kamalakar Rao and 23 others claiming ownership and possession of various plots in Survey Nos. 295, 296 and 297 situated in Chandanagar village of Serilingampally mandal and municipality. The petitioners alleged that officials of HYDRAA were trying to dispossess them and carrying out excavation work on the plots despite subsisting interim orders earlier granted by the High Court in their favour. Senior counsel B. Rachana Reddy, appearing for the petitioners, contended that the authorities were interfering with possession of the petitioners’ lands without following due process and in violation of principles of natural justice. The plea sought protection against further interference and challenged the alleged actions as arbitrary and unconstitutional. Justice Bheemapaka directed the authorities to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners dated May 25 within one week after granting them an opportunity of personal hearing, and posted the matter for further hearing on June 17.
HC relief for constable aspirants
Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court directed the Telangana State Level Police Recruitment Board to consider candidates for appointment to police constable posts against unfilled vacancies, if any, in line with the Supreme Court judgment. The writ plea was filed by Rapani Shobha and others, aspirants under the 2018 constable recruitment, who initially challenged the provisional selection list and normalisation process. It was brought to the notice of the court that in the Narimetla Vamshi case, the Supreme Court held that vacancies arising before completion of the recruitment process, such as candidates not completing stages like attestation or medical tests, must be filled by the next meritorious candidates and cannot be carried forward. In the present case, the petitioners amended their plea from challenging normalisation to seeking consideration for appointment in such unfilled vacancies under the 2018 notification. The state contended that the recruitment process under the 2018 notification was already finished and the unfilled vacancies were carried forward to the 2022 notification. Considering the fact that the petitioners only wanted a fair consideration of their candidature in the light of the Narimetla Vamshi judgment, the judge directed the state to consider their cases against available vacancies, if any, within two weeks and send selected candidates for training.
