HYDERABAD: Justice CV Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Thursday refused to grant interim relief sought by a group of private engineering colleges in connection with the TGEAPCET 2024-25 counselling process. The petitioner colleges filed a batch of writ petitions, seeking directions to the state authorities to conduct a fresh mop-up round of counselling for all engineering courses for the 2024-25 academic year and to permit admissions with full intake capacity as sanctioned by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU). The petitioners requested the high court to suspend the memos issued by the Principal Secretary, Higher Education department, and to notify all the courses offered by the petitioning institutions during the mop-up round of the Telangana State Engineering, Agriculture, and Medical Common Entrance Test (TGEAPCET) counselling.
During the hearing, the court observed that admissions for the academic year 2024–25 had already been completed, and courses had commenced on August 19, 2024. In light of this, Justice Bhaskar Reddy decided against granting interim relief sought by the petitioners and dismissed their interlocutory applications. The main writ petitions have been adjourned for further hearing.
Orders reserved in IMG Bharata land case
The Telangana High Court on Thursday reserved its orders in two PILs filed by ABK Prasad and Hyderabad-based advocate T Sriranga Rao, seeking a CBI probe into the allocation of 850 acres of land by the government of undivided Andhra Pradesh to IMG Bharata Pvt Ltd at an allegedly throwaway price and in a non-transparent manner.
During the hearing, senior counsel Vedula Venkataramana, representing IMG Bharata, told the bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J Sreenivas Rao that the petitioners have no genuine public interest in the case and are instead driven by political motives. He alleged that both petitioners have connections to the Opposition, and the land allocation was done following due deliberations and approvals by a Cabinet sub-committee appointed by the then government.
Venkataramana insisted that the land was allotted after a thorough process. He also argued that the issue has become irrelevant after the formation of Telangana under the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014, as the land in question is now under the jurisdiction of Telangana and is vested with the state government. He noted that a bench had already ruled in favour of this, and the Supreme Court had upheld the decision, leaving no grounds for further investigation.
Senior counsel Siddharth Luthra, representing former Minister P Ramulu, too contended that the PILs were politically motivated, aiming to settle scores with the TDP. After hearing arguments from both sides, the court reserved its orders in the matter.