HYDERABAD: In a setback to the Andhra Pradesh government, a Division Bench of the Hyderabad High Court on Thursday ordered status quo on the ordinance issued by the AP government abolishing all the trusts and temple committees in the State.
The Bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar pronounced this in a batch of writ petitions by R Latha, ex-chairman of Sri Varasidhi Vinayaka Swamy temple, Kanipakam in Chittoor district and several others challenging the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Ordinance dated August 9, 2014.
The petitioners submitted that with the said ordinance all the chairpersons and members of the trust boards of all institutions, including the TTD, shall cease to hold office forthwith and thereby empowering the government making it a competent authority to appoint a person or persons to exercise the powers and perform functions of these institutions till new trust boards are reconstituted and chairmen/members are appointed in accordance with the provisions of Section 15 and 96 of the Principal Act, as amended by the said ordinance.
The petitioners sought the court to declare promulgation of Andhra Pradesh Ordinance No 3 of 2014 to the extent of adding Section 163 to the existing provisions for the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, as illegal and arbitrary. They also sought the court to suspend operation of the ordinance pending disposal of the writ petitions.
While ordering status quo until further orders, the bench directed the registry to post the matter after one week.
Relief to Vijayamma
In a relief to YSR Congress leaders, the Hyderabad High Court on Thursday directed the AP government to restore security cover to YS Vijayamma, honorary president of YSR Congress party, her daughter Sharmila and son-in-law Anil Kumar.
Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao was dealing with separate petitions by the trio challenging the action of the authorities in withdrawing the security cover provided to them since 2004. While directing the authorities for restoration of security to the petitioners, the judge pointed out that it was the constitutional obligation for the government to protect lives of the citizens and the decision making authorities shall not be politically motivated.
The judge asked the police to place report of the review committee which has assessed the threat perception to the petitioners before the court. While granting the order, the judge issued notices to the respondents to file counter-affidavits and adjourned the case to next week.
