Telangana HC Lets Student Continue in School

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court refused to intervene in an interim order of a single judge directing St Paul's High School, Hyderguda, to permit a Class 10 candidate to continue her education on the condition that an undertaking would be filed, assuring her adherence to discipline. The panel comprising acting Chief Justice P. Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara was dealing with a writ appeal filed by the school. The school said that the student was reportedly found playing a UNO card game in her classroom on December 3, 2024, along with two classmates. The school informed the parents of all three children, which led them to voluntarily request Transfer Certificates (TCs) for their children. These requests, as claimed, included oral appeals to let the students finish their Class 9 and appear for final examinations. Counsel for the appellant contended that the candidate completed her examinations without further incident. Her father later wrote to the school on March 30, withdrawing the earlier request for TC. It was the case of the writ petitioner that his daughter had been unfairly singled out during the incident, where she merely happened to be holding the UNO cards when the teacher walked in. He apologised and sought her reinstatement into Class 10. The school remained unmoved. The father filed a writ plea seeking directions to reinstate his daughter. The judge granted interim relief and directed the school to allow the candidate to continue her education in Class 10, on the condition that an undertaking would be filed, assuring her adherence to discipline. It was argued that the candidate had studied in the same school since LKG, had an otherwise unblemished record, and was punished for what was, at best, a minor disciplinary lapse involving a game of skill, not gambling. It was pointed out that the deputy educational officer, in a letter to the school principal, observed that any TC obtained without a formal inquiry was null and void. The principal filed a separate writ petition challenging the adverse administrative and judicial remarks of the deputy educational officer. The panel, taking a pragmatic view, since the main writ petition was listed for final hearing on July 7, declined to interfere with the interim relief. Instead, it requested the single judge to take up the matter for final hearing on the next date or at the earliest, keeping in view the “nature and gravity” of the issue. The panel also made it clear that it had expressed no opinion on the merits.

2. HC upholds VRO’s dismissal

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ plea filed by a former village revenue officer (VRO), challenging his dismissal from service over allegations of involvement in the issuance of fake pattadar passbooks and title deeds. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Md Rafiuddin, who served as VRO for Polkampally and its hamlets, including Naganpally. The petitioner was placed under suspension by the Ranga Reddy district collector in November 2014. He was accused of illegally inserting the names of private individuals into the 2010-11 revenue records (pahanis) for land situated in Naganpally, without authorisation. The petitioner contended that the charges were baseless, the inquiry was biased, and that he acted on memos issued by the tahsildar. He alleged that key information was collected behind his back, violating the principles of natural justice. The judge rejected these claims. He held that the allegations were backed by a detailed inquiry, which revealed that several documents submitted by the petitioner, including assignment certificates and memos, were forged. The signatures of the then mandal revenue officer (MRO) were found to have been falsified. The enquiry officer concluded that such fraudulent activity could not have taken place without the petitioner’s direct involvement. Holding that the disciplinary process was not only fair but also substantiated by clear evidence, the judge ruled that the petitioner’s dismissal was justified and refused to grant any relief.

3. HC takes up school seizure plea

Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of state education authorities in seizing a running school, thereby affecting the academic future of 285 students. The judge is dealing with a writ plea filed by A.V. School, a society-run institution, which contended that despite submitting representations to the Medchal-Malkajgiri district educational officer (DEO) and the mandal educational officer, the authorities failed to act as per due process of law, leading to the school’s closure in June, just one day before the reopening date. The petitioner relied on a renewal/recognition order issued in May and contended that the representations sought permission to run the school from its new premises in Suraram Colony, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad. The respondent authorities, however, contended that a showcause notice was issued to the school on May 29, citing serious lapses. It was alleged that from 2018 onwards, there were gaps and irregularities in the Transfer Certificates (TCs) issued to students, and that the school shifted premises without obtaining prior permission from the competent authorities. After hearing both sides, the judge directed the respondents to obtain instructions and posted the matter for further hearing on Monday.

4. HC quashes dismissal of cop

Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court allowed a writ plea filed by a Cyberabad police constable challenging his removal from service despite his acquittal in a related criminal case. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by V. Paripurna Chary, who questioned the legality of disciplinary appellate and revisional orders culminating in his dismissal from service in December 2020. The petitioner was booked under the IPC on allegations of extortion. He was acquitted in August 2019 by the trial court, which held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges and relied only on uncorroborated oral testimony. Despite the acquittal, the departmental proceedings were continued and resulted in dismissal. The petitioner contended that the disciplinary authorities failed to properly consider the criminal court’s findings and that the dismissal was arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of the Telangana CCA Rules and constitutional protections. The judge noted that the criminal court discredited the prosecution’s case and held that the findings of the inquiry officer and disciplinary authority were in contradiction with those of the trial court. Observing that the acquittal order was not considered “in its totality and entirety,” the judge found that the authorities failed to exercise discretion judiciously. Accordingly, the judge set aside the dismissal order passed by the commissioner of police, Cyberabad, as well as the appellate and revisional orders passed by the Director General of Police and the principal secretary of the home department.