PIL Seeks to Protect Shankarpally Government Land

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court ordered notice in a public interest litigation (PIL) complaining of the failure of state authorities to protect government land in Shankarpally mandal. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin was hearing a PIL filed by Rajyam Mahipal Goud, who sought the protection of government land in the Survey No.392 of 227 acres and 83 guntas at Kondakal of Shankarpally mandal, Rangareddy district. It was the case of the petitioner that no action was taken by the authorities despite various representations made by him. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out negligence on the part of the state authorities in protecting the government land and contended that the simple sale deeds were registered in the name of unofficial respondents. The panel ordered notices to be issued to the authorities concerned and posted the matter after two weeks.

CBSE reply sought on non-NCERT texts

Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court granted final time to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and others, to answer to allegations in a writ petition challenging the use of non-NCERT textbooks by Don Bosco School, alleging violation of CBSE bylaws and provisions of the Right to Education Act, 2009. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Bolleddu Joshua. The petitioner was seeking directions to the CBSE to initiate action against the school for teaching unauthorised material and to impose a penalty for inaction on his complaint. The petitioner contended that under CBSE Bylaw 2.4.6 and the RTE Act, affiliated schools are mandated to follow the NCERT-prescribed syllabus. He also sought directions to ensure that private schools submit their annual statements of accounts and tuition fee details to the district educational officer and make them publicly accessible, as required under the RTE Rules. The petitioner also challenged the government order permitting “user charges,” terming it unconstitutional and sought that school fees be collected only through digital modes. The respondents sought time to file their responses.

Hosp in kidney racket seeks release of equipment

The Telangana High Court permitted the doctors of Alaknanda Multispeciality Hospital caught in the kidney transplant scandal to retrieve medical equipment from the sealed premises. The order came in a writ plea filed by Dr Guntupally Sumanth, former managing director of the hospital. The hospital was sealed following the cancellation of its licence in January in connection with an FIR over alleged illegal kidney transplantation. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the investigation was complete and that the petitioner no longer wished to operate the hospital but only intended to retrieve his medical equipment to avoid continued rental liability. It was argued that continued sealing of the premises was in violation of the Constitution. The respondent authorities stated that they had no objection to the removal of infrastructure, provided the petitioner obtained prior permission from the investigating agency. Observing that there was no serious objection from the authorities, Justice Bheemapaka directed the petitioner to approach the investigating agency for necessary permission.

HC grants anticipatory bail to bank officials

Telangana High Court granted anticipatory bail to two Axis Bank officials accused of misappropriating `6.5 crore from a customer’s account. The judge was hearing a criminal petition filed by Surekha Saini, assistant vice-president, and Sridevi Raghu, senior vice-president, Axis Bank, arrayed as accused No.s 2 and 4 in a case registered by the Panjagutta police here. According to the prosecution, the officials allegedly misused the account of the complainant, issued loose cheques and transferred funds to various accounts, including those of the complainant’s parents, without written instructions. Counsel for the petitioners argued that the transactions were examined by the Reserve Bank of India, and the FIR was filed after a two-year delay only to harass the petitioners. It was contended that all documents were with the investigating authorities, making custodial interrogation unnecessary. Observing that the material on record showed several transfers were made to the complainant’s own family members and that further custody was not required for investigation, the judge granted conditional anticipatory bail to the petitioners.