MCC violations case against Revanth, Uttam quashed
Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Monday quashed a criminal case against Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy over alleged Model Code of Conduct (MCC) violations during the 2019 Huzurnagar byelections. The case, registered at Garidepally police station, named Revanth Reddy as accused no. 2 and then MP N Uttam Kumar Reddy as accused no. 1.
They were booked under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for purportedly holding a campaign meeting in Ponugodu mandal on October 19, 2019, without permission from election officials. Police later filed a chargesheet before the Principal Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Excise Cases in Hyderabad. Justice Lakshman said MCC-related offences in this case were not maintainable and the chargesheet lacked evidence of intentional disobedience. The order came on Revanth Reddy’s plea to quash the proceedings.
2021 case: CM exempted from personal appearance
Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Monday exempted Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy from personally appearing before the Principal Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Excise Cases in a 2021 case over alleged violations of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and Covid-19 rules.
The court said he must attend if specifically required and adjourned his plea to quash the case to September 9 after issuing notices to the respondents.
The case stems from an FIR registered at the Kamalapur police station in Warangal district, under Section 188 IPC and Section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act.
Then a Congress MP, Revanth, is accused no. 7, along with six other party leaders, for allegedly holding a meeting of about 2,500 workers despite permission for only 1,000, violating election and Covid-19 restrictions.
RBI’s stand sought on denial of benefits to merged staff
The Telangana High Court on Monday issued notices to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) over a petition alleging that employees of banks merged with the State Bank of India (SBI) were denied certain benefits. The court asked the RBI to state its position on the matter by next hearing on September 10.
The petitions, filed by PTM Gopalakrishna and the All India State Bank Officers’ Federation, challenged the denial of SBI-level benefits to staff of the merged banks — State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, State Bank of Hyderabad, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala, and State Bank of Travancore.
Petitioners’ counsel argued that about 35,000 employees were being treated unfairly and that such decisions should have been made by SBI’s Central Board, not the Chief General Manager. SBI’s counsel countered that the issue was a policy decision, the mergers took place in 2017, and employees had joined under agreed terms. Extending certain allowances to all staff, he said, would cause financial strain.
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin, will also hear the RBI’s views before proceeding. Both sides were told to file short written submissions before the next hearing.