Telangana HC Stays Rule Allowing Govt Say in Tribunal Orders

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday ordered notices to the government in a plea challenging Rule 22 (2) of Telangana Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Tribunal Rules 2010. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Moinuddin was dealing with a writ petition filed by P. Laxmi and Tallapalli Visalaxmi. It was the case of the petitioners that the impugned rule provided that both the chairman and members of the endowments tribunal shall hear arguments and deliver an order either jointly or independently. It further envisaged that in case of disagreement, the chairman shall address the matter to the government for a decision. The petitioners argued that the impugned rule was ultra vires, in violation of Articles 14 and 50 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Act. The petitioners sought a direction to set aside a letter issued by Telangana Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad, referring the judicial orders issued in August to the government for a decision. The panel speaking through Chief Justice observed that in middle of judicial adjudication by a quasi-judicial body, reference to the government would defeat the purpose of adjudication by the endowments tribunal. The panel accordingly granted a stay of further proceedings with respect to the letter and posted the matter for further adjudication.

HC notice to school for denying child transportation

Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the director of school education and the management of Creekside International School, Aziznagar, in a writ plea alleging that a Grade 3 student was denied access to classes after the school abruptly withdrew his transport facility. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by the father, who complained that his son was unable to attend school for over two months due to the management’s arbitrary action. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the school discontinued the bus service in September on the pretext of alleged “misbehaviour” by the child, such as keeping his hands outside the window and not following instructions. He argued that no written warning or counselling was issued and that the school instead suggested transferring the child to another institution rather than addressing the issue constructively. Counsel further argued that the act of denying access to classes was discriminatory and violated the child’s fundamental right to education under the Constitution and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act. After hearing the submissions, Justice Nanda ordered notice to the respondents.

BJP leader relieved as SIT dissolved, CBI takes over

Justice J. Anil Kumar of the Telangana High Court made it clear that the Section 41-A notice given to BJP secretary B.L. Santhosh did not survive any longer. The judge was dealing with filed by the BJP functionary challenging a notice under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure to appear before the police (special investigation team) in a case of alleged poaching of BRS MLAs. It was the initial case of the petitioner that he was not arrayed as an accused and therefore could not be summoned under Section 41-A. Senior counsel D. Prakash Reddy pointed out that the contours of Section 41-A required that a notice be issued only when the police officer has reasons to believe that the person against whom credible information or reasonable complaint is received is involved in a cognisable offence, but arrest is not required under the parameters laid down in Section 41(1)(b) CrPC. On Tuesday, it was pointed out that the constitution of the SIT itself was quashed, and the investigation was sent to the CBI. It was pointed out that, except for the FIR and the panch statements, all material collected by the SIT be eschewed. In the course of the writ petitions, the judge had also made clear that the challenge under Section 41-A by one of the accused, Bhusarapu Srinivas, did not survive since the constitution of the SIT itself was quashed.

HC recalls NBWs against SCCL officials

Justice J. Anil Kumar of the Telangana High Court recalled an order of non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against four officials of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL). The judge on Monday had issued the NBWs against the officials for not being present in court despite a notice under the Contempt of Courts Act. The judge on Tuesday took up the unlisted matter and clarified that the order was based on an endorsement in the file that notices were served on the contemnors, though no such notice was actually served. The judge accordingly called upon the registry to take action on such officers who noted service of notice when such notice was not served and recalled the NBW. The judge was very clear that the respondents will have to purge themselves of contempt in the main case.