- Tag results for Hyderabad High Court
Petitioner’s counsel Bura Ramesh submitted that since the poll code was applicable only to political parties conducting meetings, refusing permission to the students’ meeting was not correct, he argue
The bench also directed the sub-registrars of Allur and Kovur to file counter affidavits informing whether any registrations took place after withdrawal of the letter by the temple EO.
The petitioners sought the court to entrust the case either to CBI or SIT probe.
Taking this submission into consideration, the judge directed the authorities concerned to file report on the issue raised by the petitioner, and adjourned the case hearing to Friday.
When the bench sought reply from the ECI, its standing counsel Avinash Desai said that there was no subsequent representation by the party on this issue.
Senior counsel CV Mohan Reddy, appearing for Jagan, contended that the statements made by the State Chief Minister and DGP would influence the SIT probe.
Though they were categorized as STs in Chattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh, this was not the case in Telangana.
Holding peaceful protests is part of democracy, and suppressing them , the court observed.
Jagan had moved the court on October 31 with a plea that the probe be entrusted to any appropriate independent agency not under the control of the Andhra Pradesh government.
The government’s decision to enter into a contract with the TBS created confusion as the responsibility of maintaining equipment was taken by the donors themselves.
The bench was dealing with a batch petitions filed by language pandits and special grade teachers from various districts seeking directions to the concerned authorities to implement old pension scheme
After hearing both sides, the bench directed the AG to place status report of the case before it by Tuesday, and posted the case to Nov 13.
Petitioner’s counsel Jandhyala Ravi Shankar told the court that there were still lakhs of bogus voters in the State electoral rolls.
After hearing the case and perusing the material on record, the bench said it was clear that the Union of India, Telangana as well as AP wanted creation of two High Courts as early as possible.
After hearing the case and perusing the material on record, the bench said it was clear that the Centre, Telangana and AP want two High Courts.