Justice E.V. Venugopal of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the appointment of former acting Chief Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Justice V. Eshwaraiah as ombudsman of the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA).
Hyderabad:Justice E.V. Venugopal of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the appointment of former acting Chief Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Justice V. Eshwaraiah as ombudsman of the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA). The judge was hearing a writ petition filed by the City College Old Boys Association, which contended that the appointment made under the notification dated October 25, 2024, by the Apex Council of HCA violated its bylaws. The petitioner argued that the bylaw mandated that the ombudsman be either a retired Supreme Court Judge or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court, whereas the appointee did not meet this criterion. The petitioner contended that the appointment was contrary to the decisions of the HCA general body and in violation of the Supreme Court’s judgment governing sports associations. The petitioner alleged that the decision of the Apex Council was not only irregular but also lacked transparency. During the hearing, the judge noted that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the HCA, who issued the impugned notification, was not made a party to the proceedings. Observing that the matter required detailed consideration, the judge ordered that all proceedings under the appointment notification shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition. The judge also ordered notices to the respondents and posted the matter for further hearing.
HC restores continuity of service to officer
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court set aside the reappointment order issued to a woman extension officer in the women and child welfare department and directed the state to treat her service as continuous from the date of initial appointment till her retirement. The panel comprising Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda was hearing a writ petition filed by B. Somasekharamma. The petitioner had tendered her resignation in 2003 during the pendency of departmental proceedings but was later allowed to withdraw it in 2009. Instead of reinstating her with continuity of service, the authorities treated it as a fresh reappointment. The petitioner contended that her resignation was submitted under pressure while departmental proceedings were pending, and since Rule 30(a)(iii) of the AP State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996, prohibited acceptance of resignation during pendency of disciplinary proceedings, the acceptance itself was illegal and void ab initio. The petitioner argued that once the government permitted her to withdraw the resignation, she should have been reinstated with continuity of service and entitled to pensionary and retirement benefits. The respondent authorities contended that the petitioner’s resignation was voluntarily tendered and was accepted as per the rules. They claimed that she was permitted to rejoin service only as a fresh appointee in 2009 and hence was not entitled to claim continuity of service or retirement benefits for the earlier period. It was further contended that the petitioner had failed to establish any legal right to treat the resignation as non est. The panel held that the acceptance of resignation during the pendency of departmental proceedings was contrary to Rule 30(a)(iii) and hence illegal. It was observed that permitting withdrawal of resignation later, but treating it as a reappointment, was unsustainable. The panel directed the authorities to treat the petitioner as having continued in service for all purposes except for monetary benefits for the intervening period between resignation and rejoining. The state was directed to release her pensionary and retirement benefits within three months, failing which interest at 6 per cent per annum would apply.
HC halts illegal work in Tellapur
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed the commissioner of Tellapur municipality and the HMDA to consider the representations of a housing society alleging illegal construction activity and damage to utilities by private builders in Tellapur. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by BHEL Employees Model Mutually Aided Cooperative House Building Society Ltd, which represents residents of a gated community comprising 1,251 villas. The petitioner society alleged that the respondent builders unlawfully carried out excavation and drainage work, including damaging an STP pipeline and connecting an external drainage line from an under-construction high-rise apartment complex, with the support of municipal officials and the Kollur police station house officer. The petitioner contended that repeated representations to the authorities yielded no response, amounting to inaction and violation of duties under the Telangana Municipalities Act and HMDA Act. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the disputed land, a 1,200-square-yard plot abutting Park 10, was originally earmarked for commercial use for the benefit of villa owners but was now being developed as a residential apartment complex by the private respondents, resulting in disruption to the water supply of over 400 villas. Counsel for the municipality informed the judge that a showcause notice had been issued to the private builders following the latest complaint. Taking note of the same, the judge directed the petitioner to file a detailed representation within three days and ordered the commissioner and HMDA to consider the rival representations and pass a reasoned order within three weeks. Until then, the judge directed that the status quo be maintained at the site and restrained the private builders from carrying out further construction activity.
