Justice league: Telangana HC issues stay on removal of APP

The petitioner contended that the termination was arbitrary, illegal and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.
Telangana HC
Telangana HC(Photo | EPS)

Justice CV Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court granted an interim stay on the order issued on January 4 this year, terminating the services of G Shyam Rao as the additional public prosecutor (tenure) at the Court of V Additional District and Sessions Judge in Bodhan, Nizamabad district. Justice Bhaskar was hearing a writ petition filed by Shyam Rao, challenging the state government’s decision. Executed through GO 9, it cited alleged violation of the model code of conduct (MCC) during the recent Assembly elections.

The petitioner contended that the termination was arbitrary, illegal and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. It was argued that the government, represented by its principal secretary, Home (Court-A1) department, had terminated the services without issuing any notice or conducting an enquiry. The petitioner further said that the termination order was in contravention of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and Clause 9 of Telangana Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Instructions, 2000, issued vide GO 187 Law department dated December 6, 2000. Justice Bhaskar considered the petitioner’s contentions and issued notices to the respondent authorities. He also granted an interim stay on the termination orders and adjourned the case to four weeks.

HC dismisses V&AH asst director’s quash petition

Justice T Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by Muntha Aditya Kesava Sai, Assistant Director of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry (V&AH) department, seeking the quashing of an FIR filed against him at Gachibowli Police Station in a case related to corruption. The FIR was subsequently altered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Hyderabad. The petitioner contended that he has nothing to do with the allegations made in the complaint. His counsel argued that the said transactions were made in August 2023 and the case was filed in December 2023, after the Assembly elections. The petitioner claimed to have already received interim relief from the court, preventing any coercive action against him.

Ch Vidya Sagar Rao, standing counsel for the ACB, countered these arguments, stating that the petitioner, entrusted with responsibilities related to the sheep earing development scheme, was involved in tagging, loading, photography and uploading details on scheme’s portal. Stating that the petitioner’s reliance on a previous court order was misplaced as it pertains to a different accused and a distinct aspect of the alleged crime, Justice Madhavi Devi dismissed the petition.

No-trust motions: Civic body chiefs move bench

A bench of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday issued notices to the State government, represented by the MAUD special chief secretary and various other officials in response to a batch of writ petitions filed by municipal chairpersons and a mayor challenging the orders of a single judge. The petitioners — Pillodi Jayamma of Sadasivpet, Pokala Jamuna of Jangaon, Gudem Mallaiah of Jogipet and Vaspari Shankaraiah of Alair and Mekala Kavya, the Mayor of Jawaharnagar Municipal Corporation, have contested the orders of a single judge related to no-confidence motions against them, before the bench of Chief Justice Alok Aaradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti.

The petitioners said that they were elected as chairpersons and mayor in the elections held in January 2020 and were now facing no-confidence motions moved by members of their respective civic bodies. The members urged the respective district collectors to convene a special meeting under Section 37 of the new Act, 2019. In response, the petitioners challenged the notifications for these special meetings.

The single judge, after hearing the contention of the petitioners, dismissed their petitions. Challenging the orders of the single judge, the petitioners filed writ appeals before the bench. The bench issued notices to the respondent authorities and adjourned the matter to January 29.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com