By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Sept 27 : The AP High Court has stayed land acquisition in Maheswaram mandal of Ranga Reddy district for the proposed township by Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority.
Ms Bandari Andalu, a resident of Srinagar village in the mandal challenged the land acquisition. The HMDA had a joint venture with Ramky Estates and Farms Pvt Ltd to develop a township at cost of Rs 2,500 crore in 1,000 acres.
The HMDA took up land acquisition in 220 acres in Maheswaram mandal for the township. In the process, the HMDA and Revenue Authorities passed an consent award after negotiations with local farmers and land holders.
They issued two cheques of different denominations, totalling Rs 3.78 crore to Ms Andalu towards compensation for 5 acres which she had in Srinagar village.
According to the petitioner, the authorities issued cheques belonging to a private bank and later they stopped the payment.
The petitioner told the court that she came to know that the authorities have stopped the payment based on an anonymous complaint that she was not in possession of the land.
Dealing with the petition, Justice L Narasimha Reddy expressed his surprise over issuing a cheque belonging to a private bank to the petitioner.
The judge asked "how can you issue a private cheque. As per the law the land acquisition officer has to made payment to the land holders through the government cheques. Why did you opted the method of private payment , the court is not able to understand?".
Justice Narasimha Reddy , further said " Why is the HMDA acquiring hundreds of acres ? Is the land used for the purpose for which it was acquired".
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Court stays Ramoji trial
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Sept 9 : The AP High Court on Tuesday stayed the criminal proceedings against media baron Ch Ramoji Rao, including his appearance in a case related to financial irregularities in Margadarsi Financiers, pending before the first additional chief metropolitan court at Nampally in the city.
The court issued summons to Ramoji Rao on June 18, 2008, following a complaint filed by Mr T Krishna Raju, the inspector-general (CID) and the authorised officer in the case.
In his complaint, Mr Raju alleged that Mr Rao and his firm violated Section 45-S (1), (i) and 45-S (2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1953.
The government appointed Mr S Satyanarayana Prasad, senior counsel, as a special public prosecutor to deal with the case. Mr Ramoji Rao challenged the validity of the government order issued on February 19, 2007 appointing a Special Public Prosecutor for filing applications and complaints under Section 58 (E) of Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 to prosecute Margadarsi Financiers.
He also challenged the appointment of Ms Sindhu Kumari, advocate, to assist Special Public Prosecutor.
While passing interim orders on the petition Justice Ms G Rohini observed that "I am the opinion that the order is illegal and unsustainable and consequential this complaint presented by the Special Public Prosecutor is not valid. Hence the proceedings in the case cannot be allowed to go on ".
The court granted interim suspension of the appointment of the special public prosecutor as well as the stay of all further proceedings in the case until further orders.
The court issued notices to the all the respondents in the petition.
Hyderabad, Sept 9 : The AP High Court on Tuesday stayed the criminal proceedings against media baron Ch Ramoji Rao, including his appearance in a case related to financial irregularities in Margadarsi Financiers, pending before the first additional chief metropolitan court at Nampally in the city.
The court issued summons to Ramoji Rao on June 18, 2008, following a complaint filed by Mr T Krishna Raju, the inspector-general (CID) and the authorised officer in the case.
In his complaint, Mr Raju alleged that Mr Rao and his firm violated Section 45-S (1), (i) and 45-S (2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1953.
The government appointed Mr S Satyanarayana Prasad, senior counsel, as a special public prosecutor to deal with the case. Mr Ramoji Rao challenged the validity of the government order issued on February 19, 2007 appointing a Special Public Prosecutor for filing applications and complaints under Section 58 (E) of Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 to prosecute Margadarsi Financiers.
He also challenged the appointment of Ms Sindhu Kumari, advocate, to assist Special Public Prosecutor.
While passing interim orders on the petition Justice Ms G Rohini observed that "I am the opinion that the order is illegal and unsustainable and consequential this complaint presented by the Special Public Prosecutor is not valid. Hence the proceedings in the case cannot be allowed to go on ".
The court granted interim suspension of the appointment of the special public prosecutor as well as the stay of all further proceedings in the case until further orders.
The court issued notices to the all the respondents in the petition.
State defends VIP lands
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Sept.9 : The State government has defended the allotment of housesites to MLAs, MPs, All-India Service Officers and journalists, before the AP High Court.
The government filed an affidavit on Tuesday pursuant to a notice of the court on a writ petition filed by Dr Rao VBJ Chelikani and the Campaign for Housing and Tenural Rights challenging the allotment.
The government has contended that this was its policy and it was well-settled law that while dealing with the policy decisions the Constitutional courts have limited scope.
It contended that the allotment was a welfare measure and it cannot be equated with the duty of the allot land to weaker sections.
The government told the court that the allotment was a one time benefit to these sections based on their services to the state and the people.
It argued that allotting housesites only to those who do not possess a house or plot would be harsh and discriminatory to those who have private properties acquired through ancestors or through spouses.
It contended that "so long as such allotment is one time benefit, allotting housesites to those who possess a own house or site cannot be termed as arbitrary , moreso, when land is being allotted for a consideration".
It was submitted that the division bench, which dealt with the similar petitions earlier, did not find fault with the policy.
A special bench comprising Justice Nooty Rammohan Rao and Justice C V Nagarjuna Reddy will hear the case .
Hyderabad, Sept.9 : The State government has defended the allotment of housesites to MLAs, MPs, All-India Service Officers and journalists, before the AP High Court.
The government filed an affidavit on Tuesday pursuant to a notice of the court on a writ petition filed by Dr Rao VBJ Chelikani and the Campaign for Housing and Tenural Rights challenging the allotment.
The government has contended that this was its policy and it was well-settled law that while dealing with the policy decisions the Constitutional courts have limited scope.
It contended that the allotment was a welfare measure and it cannot be equated with the duty of the allot land to weaker sections.
The government told the court that the allotment was a one time benefit to these sections based on their services to the state and the people.
It argued that allotting housesites only to those who do not possess a house or plot would be harsh and discriminatory to those who have private properties acquired through ancestors or through spouses.
It contended that "so long as such allotment is one time benefit, allotting housesites to those who possess a own house or site cannot be termed as arbitrary , moreso, when land is being allotted for a consideration".
It was submitted that the division bench, which dealt with the similar petitions earlier, did not find fault with the policy.
A special bench comprising Justice Nooty Rammohan Rao and Justice C V Nagarjuna Reddy will hear the case .
Friday, September 5, 2008
Ramoji filed a writ
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, September 5: Media baron and Eenadu group of companies Chairman Mr. Ch. Ramoji Rao on Thursday files a writ petition in the AP High Court seeking a direction to quash the appointment of senior advocate S. Satyanarayana Prasad as a special public prosecutor in the cases of Margadarsi Financiers.
The petitioner challenged the validity of the government order issued on February 19, 2007 appointing a Special Public Prosecutor for filing applications and complaints Under Section 58 (E) of Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 to prosecute Margadarsi Financiers.
The petitioner also challenged the appointment of Ms Sindhu Kumari, advocate, to assist Special Public Prosecutor.
Mr. Ramoji told the court that the political party in power in the state out of malafides initiated proceedings against the petitioners and their group of companies. He alleged that the malafides arose out of the exposures made by the print and electronic media operated by the group of petitioners about misuse of power by the party functionaries in the state.
He informed the court that he has already discharged major portion of the deposit liability by making premature payments to the depositors.
Mr. Ramoji contended that the appointment was without jurisdiction and contrary to statute and is liable to set aside.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)