By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb 18 : The Hyderbad city joint police commissioner, Mr P. S. R. Anjaneyulu,on Thursday, admitted before Justice L Narashima Reddy of the State
High Court that the two-wheeler of a media person was burnt by the
police personnel in the OU campus on Feb 14.
He told the court that there was no truth in the allegation that the police
had beaten girl students. The judge, who got irritated with the body
language of the official, grilled him in a packed court.
The official was summoned by the court while dealing with a petition
filed by an injured scribe Mr Narasinga Rao in lathicharge.
When the official told the court that there was no lathicharge on girls,
the judge said he was over confident.
" We are in a civilised society and have to respect women. I found not
an iota of repentance in him for the heinous attack on students. The
audacity and the attitude of the official was the main reason for the Feb
14 & 15 incidents on the OU campus, '' he said.
When the judge told the official that he would order a CBI probe on
lathicharge, the official nodded his head in approval.
At this stage, Mr D. V. Seetharam Murthy, advocate-general intervened
and told the court that the girl students received injuries when they
tried to escape from stone pelting.
He said the government already had ordered the CID chief to inquire
into the matter and submit a report. He urged the court to grant some
time so that he can file a counter affidavit and also the report of the
CID.
"While the Chief Minster and the Home Minister admitted that
lathicharge took place and apologised to the students and the media for
the same, the official flatly denied it showing his tenacity, '' the judge
remarked.
When the judge asked the joint police commissioner the remaining
years of his service, Mr Anjaneyulu said 18. The judge quipped by
saying `it is better we are all insured.'
The judge further asked him whether he had initiated any action against
those who torched the scribe's vehicle.
When he replied in the negative, the judge said this was enough to
suspend the official. He said he would leave it to the discretion of the
DGP and the government. The official told the judge that he brought all
the facts to the notice of the DGP and the Commissioner.
The joint commissioner while narrating the situation on Feb 14, said
that he received information that there was some trouble on the
campus, when he was in a meeting related to security arrangements for
Assembly session.
He said when he reached the university, he found students gathered at
Osmania B Hostel and Arts college and were trying to move towards
Tarnaka. The police prevented them and asked them to disburse ,
meanwhile some students started pelting stones on the police and some
police personnel were injured. Later police lathicharged and used
teargas shells to disburse them. The media personnel received injuries
during the scuffle between students and the police. He denied the
allegation that the media was targeted.
He contended that they had reliable information of outsiders entering
the campus.
Then the judge asked why they had not been arrested. The officer
replied that they had arrested a few of them. He informed the judge that
he left the campus as soon as he received information that this court
ruled for removal of his presence from the campus.
Mr D Prakash Reddy. senior counsel for the petitioner contended that
the official had been telling stories to cover up their fault. He asked the
judge to record the statement of the official that the police torched the
scribe's vehicle.
The judge referring to the lathicharge on Dwacra women at Vizag,
observed that the police were in a "trigger-and-lathi happy" mood.
While keeping the option of ordering CBI probe open, the judge
directed the government to file a counter affidavit explaining when
armed forces were deployed, what facilities have been provided to them
and expenditure incurred for keeping the forces. The matter was posted
to March 1 for further hearing.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tough passage for Hyderabad joint police commissioner Mr. PSR Anjaneyulu
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb 18 : The City police found it tough to make a safe passage for their senior officer Mr PSR Anjaneyulu, joint commissioner of police, to bring him out of the crowded and surcharged AP High court premises.
For once, the men in the kakhi found themselves on the defensive when
they had to help their flamboyant and controversial JPC to step out of the
court premises. The legal fraternity was so surcharged it looked as if the
men in black vests would pounce on the official for his brash acts on OU
campus.
The officials noticed the advocates of Telangana region were a bit tensed up
and would directly confront the JC when he was moving out of the court
hall.
Mr Anjaneyulu entered the premises surrounded by Mr Madhusudhan
Reddy, Mr Mahesh Chandra Ladha, Mr Atul Singh and Ms Charu Sinha , all
IPS officers and a large posse of police in plain clothes.
A woman advocate tried tease Mr Anjaneyulu when he was passing through
the corridor by asking him whether he was frightened.
She heckled at him saying `does he need such security?' He retorted by
pointing towards his revolver and saying it was enough for him. Through
another hand gesture, he said the force accompanying is to protect all the
others.
The advocate used some selective epithets on him. After the hearing of the
case, he was taken out from the premises in a tricky way by elevator,
diverting the attention of the aggressive group of advocates.
With the heavy deployment of police on all roads leading to the High Court,
the entire area reminded of a fortress.
Hyderabad, Feb 18 : The City police found it tough to make a safe passage for their senior officer Mr PSR Anjaneyulu, joint commissioner of police, to bring him out of the crowded and surcharged AP High court premises.
For once, the men in the kakhi found themselves on the defensive when
they had to help their flamboyant and controversial JPC to step out of the
court premises. The legal fraternity was so surcharged it looked as if the
men in black vests would pounce on the official for his brash acts on OU
campus.
The officials noticed the advocates of Telangana region were a bit tensed up
and would directly confront the JC when he was moving out of the court
hall.
Mr Anjaneyulu entered the premises surrounded by Mr Madhusudhan
Reddy, Mr Mahesh Chandra Ladha, Mr Atul Singh and Ms Charu Sinha , all
IPS officers and a large posse of police in plain clothes.
A woman advocate tried tease Mr Anjaneyulu when he was passing through
the corridor by asking him whether he was frightened.
She heckled at him saying `does he need such security?' He retorted by
pointing towards his revolver and saying it was enough for him. Through
another hand gesture, he said the force accompanying is to protect all the
others.
The advocate used some selective epithets on him. After the hearing of the
case, he was taken out from the premises in a tricky way by elevator,
diverting the attention of the aggressive group of advocates.
With the heavy deployment of police on all roads leading to the High Court,
the entire area reminded of a fortress.
AP High Court tell CEC you acted beyond your brief
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb 18 : A division bench comprising acting Chief Justice T Meena Kumari and Justice G Chandraiah, on Thursday, pulled up the Central Empowered Committee on Environment and Forest for recommending stopping of mining operations at Anantapur by Obulapuram Mining Company.
The CEC recommendation was beyond its purview, the bench felt. The bench asked Mr A. D. N. Rao, advocate of the Supreme Court who appeared on behalf of the CEC to show that the committee is empowered to pass orders.
The bench was dealing with the petitions filed by the OMC against the
orders of the state government which stalled the mining operations
including transportation of iron ore.
It may be mentioned that the Apex Court referred the matter back to the
High Court while suspending the orders of a division bench which
allowed the OMC to transport extracted iron ore from its stockyards.
Justice Meena Kumari asked the advocate to produce a provision
either from any of the statute or the guidelines prescribed by the Apex
Court , to prove that the CEC can independently pass orders in any
matter related to forest and environment.
The judge observed that the CEC is not a judicial authority and cannot
act beyond the board. If that is the case, the CEC may one day ask the
courts to stop functioning.
Mr Rao said that Supreme Court constituted the committee to monitor
and made suggestions to the Green Bench of the Apex Court in matters
related to environment and forest. He said that 99 per cent of the
recommendations of the CEC were accepted by the Apex Court and the
Committee passed orders independently.
The judge recalling that the Apex Court had not accepted the CEC
report in this issue, said that the Committee has a responsibility to visit
the site before it submitting recommendation to the state government
on mining operations.
The bench asked the advocate how can the committee come to a
conclusion when there was a boundary dispute between the mining
companies at Anantapur and also the companies encroached into
Bellary reserve forest by sitting at a far away place.
Mr Narasimham, Supreme Court senior counsel who appeared for the
OMC , contended that the report of the Apex Court dated 14 December
, 2007 had no relevance to the issue of OMC and the CEC cannot act
based on the report. The bench reserved its orders.
Elsewhere, the bench permitted the Bellary Iron Ore Pvt Ltd to
transport iron ore which was lying its stockyard by depositing Rs 1. 50
crore.
Hyderabad, Feb 18 : A division bench comprising acting Chief Justice T Meena Kumari and Justice G Chandraiah, on Thursday, pulled up the Central Empowered Committee on Environment and Forest for recommending stopping of mining operations at Anantapur by Obulapuram Mining Company.
The CEC recommendation was beyond its purview, the bench felt. The bench asked Mr A. D. N. Rao, advocate of the Supreme Court who appeared on behalf of the CEC to show that the committee is empowered to pass orders.
The bench was dealing with the petitions filed by the OMC against the
orders of the state government which stalled the mining operations
including transportation of iron ore.
It may be mentioned that the Apex Court referred the matter back to the
High Court while suspending the orders of a division bench which
allowed the OMC to transport extracted iron ore from its stockyards.
Justice Meena Kumari asked the advocate to produce a provision
either from any of the statute or the guidelines prescribed by the Apex
Court , to prove that the CEC can independently pass orders in any
matter related to forest and environment.
The judge observed that the CEC is not a judicial authority and cannot
act beyond the board. If that is the case, the CEC may one day ask the
courts to stop functioning.
Mr Rao said that Supreme Court constituted the committee to monitor
and made suggestions to the Green Bench of the Apex Court in matters
related to environment and forest. He said that 99 per cent of the
recommendations of the CEC were accepted by the Apex Court and the
Committee passed orders independently.
The judge recalling that the Apex Court had not accepted the CEC
report in this issue, said that the Committee has a responsibility to visit
the site before it submitting recommendation to the state government
on mining operations.
The bench asked the advocate how can the committee come to a
conclusion when there was a boundary dispute between the mining
companies at Anantapur and also the companies encroached into
Bellary reserve forest by sitting at a far away place.
Mr Narasimham, Supreme Court senior counsel who appeared for the
OMC , contended that the report of the Apex Court dated 14 December
, 2007 had no relevance to the issue of OMC and the CEC cannot act
based on the report. The bench reserved its orders.
Elsewhere, the bench permitted the Bellary Iron Ore Pvt Ltd to
transport iron ore which was lying its stockyard by depositing Rs 1. 50
crore.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Withdraw Central forces from OU: AP High Court
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb. 15: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday ordered the state government to withdraw all paramilitary and special forces deployed in the Osmania University campus immediately.
Justice L. Narasimha Reddy criticised the police for its high-handed behaviour in tackling the campus situation and singled out the joint commissioner,
Mr P.S.R. Anjaneyulu, for sharper criticism for the way he conducted himself.
Girl students on the campus had been terrified with the uniformed ranks behaving like hardcore hooligans, the Judge said while dealing with a lunch motion moved by three students of the university.
At the same time, the High Court also asked students not to disturb classes and exams and warned that they would be taken to task if they resort to acts of criminal intimidation or violence.
“This court is of the view that the deployment of police in the campus has not only tarnished the image of the university, but also created a situation of panic and insecurity,” said Justice Reddy.
To keep peace in the university, the government should deploy an adequate number of civil police personnel in the university police station, the court said.
They can take care of any untoward incident in OU, and special forces can be deployed with the Vice-Chancellor’s permission only when the situation goes out of control. The court said there were no records of arson, murder or brutal attack at OU.
“If one goes by channel news, one feels the police is determined to enter the campus in thousands without provocation,” said Justice Reddy. “Mostly, troubles start due to unwarranted police reaction.”
When the petitioner’s counsel, Mr Satyam Reddy, complained about Mr Anjaneyulu, the judge asked the state counsel to take steps to prevent his entry into the campus.
Hyderabad, Feb. 15: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday ordered the state government to withdraw all paramilitary and special forces deployed in the Osmania University campus immediately.
Justice L. Narasimha Reddy criticised the police for its high-handed behaviour in tackling the campus situation and singled out the joint commissioner,
Mr P.S.R. Anjaneyulu, for sharper criticism for the way he conducted himself.
Girl students on the campus had been terrified with the uniformed ranks behaving like hardcore hooligans, the Judge said while dealing with a lunch motion moved by three students of the university.
At the same time, the High Court also asked students not to disturb classes and exams and warned that they would be taken to task if they resort to acts of criminal intimidation or violence.
“This court is of the view that the deployment of police in the campus has not only tarnished the image of the university, but also created a situation of panic and insecurity,” said Justice Reddy.
To keep peace in the university, the government should deploy an adequate number of civil police personnel in the university police station, the court said.
They can take care of any untoward incident in OU, and special forces can be deployed with the Vice-Chancellor’s permission only when the situation goes out of control. The court said there were no records of arson, murder or brutal attack at OU.
“If one goes by channel news, one feels the police is determined to enter the campus in thousands without provocation,” said Justice Reddy. “Mostly, troubles start due to unwarranted police reaction.”
When the petitioner’s counsel, Mr Satyam Reddy, complained about Mr Anjaneyulu, the judge asked the state counsel to take steps to prevent his entry into the campus.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
AP High Court for concession on power tariff to food processing firms
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb. 13: The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the Central Power Distribution Company Ltd to extend concessional rate of tariff at Rs 1.75 per unit to food processing industries as an incentive announced by the state government under GO Ms. No. 333 in 2003.
The court ruled that all the concessions (except capital subsidy) provided under the state policy on food processing industries, shall be extended to the existing units treating them as new units.
Justice C.V. Ramulu while allowing the writ petitions filed by M/s. Kalyan Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd and others, ruled that the GO Ms. No. 179 issued on June 22, 2005 has no retrospective effect and the incentives extended under the GO No. 333 do not stand cancelled. The judge said: “The GO No. 333 was issued after making a study of the existing industries and the difficulties they face in sustaining themselves. Therefore, it cannot be said that the existing units are not entitled to incentives and concessions under the GO or that the incentives and concessions already extended in favour of the petitioner stand either cancelled or invalidated.”
The court observed that the tariff, something like a tax holiday, which was already extended for the sustenance of the existing food processing units, cannot be said to have been taken away under GO No. 179. The court said that no invidious discrimination could have been made between the existing and the fresh food processing units in availing tariff concessions. Justice Ramulu was of the opinion that “the very concept of extending incentives and concessions is for sustenance of the industry already existing.”
The judge set aside the orders passed by the CPDCL authorities in cancelling power tariff concessions to the petitioners’ units.
Hyderabad, Feb. 13: The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the Central Power Distribution Company Ltd to extend concessional rate of tariff at Rs 1.75 per unit to food processing industries as an incentive announced by the state government under GO Ms. No. 333 in 2003.
The court ruled that all the concessions (except capital subsidy) provided under the state policy on food processing industries, shall be extended to the existing units treating them as new units.
Justice C.V. Ramulu while allowing the writ petitions filed by M/s. Kalyan Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd and others, ruled that the GO Ms. No. 179 issued on June 22, 2005 has no retrospective effect and the incentives extended under the GO No. 333 do not stand cancelled. The judge said: “The GO No. 333 was issued after making a study of the existing industries and the difficulties they face in sustaining themselves. Therefore, it cannot be said that the existing units are not entitled to incentives and concessions under the GO or that the incentives and concessions already extended in favour of the petitioner stand either cancelled or invalidated.”
The court observed that the tariff, something like a tax holiday, which was already extended for the sustenance of the existing food processing units, cannot be said to have been taken away under GO No. 179. The court said that no invidious discrimination could have been made between the existing and the fresh food processing units in availing tariff concessions. Justice Ramulu was of the opinion that “the very concept of extending incentives and concessions is for sustenance of the industry already existing.”
The judge set aside the orders passed by the CPDCL authorities in cancelling power tariff concessions to the petitioners’ units.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
AP High Court: Land allotted before 1958 not under assignment rules
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 12: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has reiterated that the Assignment Rules, 1958, do not apply to lands assigned prior to 1958 and assignment of such lands cannot be cancelled.
Justice C.V. Ramulu allowed a writ petition filed against an order passed on January 27, 2007 under the provisions of the AP Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977, by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy for resumption of 142.39 acres of assigned lands.
For the third time, the government received a setback for the same lands since from 1997. A legal battle is on between the government and the petitioner for the past two decades.
Justice Ramulu said “from the facts it is clear that the entire cause of action was sought to be dug up for the purpose of denying compensation to the petitioners.”
According to the petitioners, they and their forefathers occupied 150 acres of government barren lands at Manchirevula village since 1940 and applied to the erstwhile government of Hyderabad for sanction of pattas under the Laoni Rules of the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act, 1370Fasli.
The government of Hyderabad, based on a report from the Collector sanctioned assignment of 200 acres of Astabal Kancha of Manchirevula village to the landless poor under special Laoni Rules. In 1961, actual patta certificates were issued.
The inspector-general of police of Special Security Force, sent requisitions to the state government on January 12, 1993 for allotment of land to set up a training academy for the SPF.
The litigation began when the DRO, issued a show-cause notice on March 28, 1994 proposing to resume the land on the ground that it had not been put to cultivation. The petitioners approached the High Court and got interim relief. Later a single judge of the High Court quashed the proposals.The order of the single judge was upheld by a Division Bench in 1998.
However, the government approached the Supreme Court and it set aside the orders of the Division Bench in 2000 on the ground that the jurisdiction was vested with the collector.
In spite of the apex court’s direction, a joint collector conducted an inquiry afresh by overruling the objections of the petitioners. The petitioners knocked the High Court’s door in 2002 against the order.
The court set aside the joint collector’s order on April 4, 2002, directing the collector to pass orders afresh. At last on May 10, 2003 the collector passed orders to resume the land. The High Court again quashed the collector’s orders in 2006.
Once again the MRO issued notice to the petitioners on February 11, 2006, to take back their lands and passed orders in 2007.
The government contended that the then tahsildar, West division, has assigned 142.39 acres to several individuals in 1961 in accordance with the Revised Assignment Policy of 1958. It argued that it has power to take beck assigned lands at any point of time.
Hyderabad,Feb. 12: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has reiterated that the Assignment Rules, 1958, do not apply to lands assigned prior to 1958 and assignment of such lands cannot be cancelled.
Justice C.V. Ramulu allowed a writ petition filed against an order passed on January 27, 2007 under the provisions of the AP Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977, by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy for resumption of 142.39 acres of assigned lands.
For the third time, the government received a setback for the same lands since from 1997. A legal battle is on between the government and the petitioner for the past two decades.
Justice Ramulu said “from the facts it is clear that the entire cause of action was sought to be dug up for the purpose of denying compensation to the petitioners.”
According to the petitioners, they and their forefathers occupied 150 acres of government barren lands at Manchirevula village since 1940 and applied to the erstwhile government of Hyderabad for sanction of pattas under the Laoni Rules of the Telangana Area Land Revenue Act, 1370Fasli.
The government of Hyderabad, based on a report from the Collector sanctioned assignment of 200 acres of Astabal Kancha of Manchirevula village to the landless poor under special Laoni Rules. In 1961, actual patta certificates were issued.
The inspector-general of police of Special Security Force, sent requisitions to the state government on January 12, 1993 for allotment of land to set up a training academy for the SPF.
The litigation began when the DRO, issued a show-cause notice on March 28, 1994 proposing to resume the land on the ground that it had not been put to cultivation. The petitioners approached the High Court and got interim relief. Later a single judge of the High Court quashed the proposals.The order of the single judge was upheld by a Division Bench in 1998.
However, the government approached the Supreme Court and it set aside the orders of the Division Bench in 2000 on the ground that the jurisdiction was vested with the collector.
In spite of the apex court’s direction, a joint collector conducted an inquiry afresh by overruling the objections of the petitioners. The petitioners knocked the High Court’s door in 2002 against the order.
The court set aside the joint collector’s order on April 4, 2002, directing the collector to pass orders afresh. At last on May 10, 2003 the collector passed orders to resume the land. The High Court again quashed the collector’s orders in 2006.
Once again the MRO issued notice to the petitioners on February 11, 2006, to take back their lands and passed orders in 2007.
The government contended that the then tahsildar, West division, has assigned 142.39 acres to several individuals in 1961 in accordance with the Revised Assignment Policy of 1958. It argued that it has power to take beck assigned lands at any point of time.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
AP High Court quashes 4 per cent reservation to Muslims
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 8: The AP High Court in a majority decision on Monday struck down as nsustainable the legislation providing four per cent reservation in educational institutions and government jobs to backward groups among Muslims.
A seven-member bench headed by Chief Justice Anil R. Dave was divided 5-2 and provided three different decisions while striking down the legislation. Justice Dave while pronouncing the verdict on his behalf and on behalf of Justice A. Gopal Reddy, Justice V. Eswaraiah and Justice G. Raghuram opin-ed that the legislation failed to define the expressions “Muslim” and “other Mus-lim groups.” The Act violated Articles 14, 15(1) and 16 (2) of the Constitution.
The court faulted the surveys relied upon by the BC Commission to enumerate Muslim backwardness. The commission’s own survey was “not sufficient,” it said.
The judges said, “In our opinion, the 2007 Act is religion-specific and potentially encourages religious conversion, and is thus unsustainable.” The court struck down the AP Reservations in Favour of Socially and Education-ally Backward Classes of Muslims Act, 2007 and the Government Orders Ms 23 and 231 to provide reservation for Muslim.
verdict is third setback for State
Justice Meena Kumari of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, who partly agreed with the decision of the Chief Justice to strike down Muslim reservations, rendered her verdict separately. She declared that the government has the power to refer to the BC Commission for identifying backward classes to provide reservation to socially and educationally backward classes.
Justice B. Prakash Rao and Justice D.S.R. Varma totally differed with the majority opinion. Justice Varma said he would pass orders soon by citing reasons for dismissal of the writs filed against the Act.
Justice Prakash Rao said that he would confine himself to answering the references made by the five-member bench which had dealt earlier with the same petition.
This is the third setback for the state government on the issue.
In 2004, the AP High Court had struck down a government order providing five per cent reservations to Muslims.
In 2005, the government issued Ordinance 13 and subsequently enacted a Bill. These were also struck down by the High Court. The government moved an SLP against the verdict in Supreme Court which is pending.
The Act struck down on Monday was enacted in 2007. This Act had been stayed by the High Court and the apex court suspended the stay on an appeal by the state government.
In the main, the court faulted the BC Commission for relying on surveys which were unscientific and irrational and not carried out for the purpose of enumerating backwardness among Muslims.
The BC Commission carried out its own survey but the court found that it was “not sufficient,” and the report is “not based on real facts, data or analysis and is without proper survey.” The commission had limited its survey to six districts within three days.
The court also pointed out that “the legislature ought to have taken care, while making the enactment, to define the word ‘Muslim’ and the phrase ‘other Muslim groups’ and state clearly as to who actually falls within these definitions, for enjoying the benefits under the Act.”
The court was dealing with a petition filed by an advocate, Mr Muralidhar Rao, and a student, Ms Tejasri. Another advocate, Mr K. Kondala Rao, and several other individuals and organisations filed petitions challenging and in favour of the legislation.
Justice Anil R. Dave declared that the recommendations set out in the report of the AP Backward Commission submitted on July 2, 2007, are unsustainable as it failed to spell out relevant criteria for identification of social and educational backwardness and inadequate representation in public employment among classes of persons belonging to the Muslim community.
He pointed out that the commission failed in obtaining the population figure of several classes, groups belonging to the Muslim community for inclusion of BC Group-E.
Hyderabad,Feb. 8: The AP High Court in a majority decision on Monday struck down as nsustainable the legislation providing four per cent reservation in educational institutions and government jobs to backward groups among Muslims.
A seven-member bench headed by Chief Justice Anil R. Dave was divided 5-2 and provided three different decisions while striking down the legislation. Justice Dave while pronouncing the verdict on his behalf and on behalf of Justice A. Gopal Reddy, Justice V. Eswaraiah and Justice G. Raghuram opin-ed that the legislation failed to define the expressions “Muslim” and “other Mus-lim groups.” The Act violated Articles 14, 15(1) and 16 (2) of the Constitution.
The court faulted the surveys relied upon by the BC Commission to enumerate Muslim backwardness. The commission’s own survey was “not sufficient,” it said.
The judges said, “In our opinion, the 2007 Act is religion-specific and potentially encourages religious conversion, and is thus unsustainable.” The court struck down the AP Reservations in Favour of Socially and Education-ally Backward Classes of Muslims Act, 2007 and the Government Orders Ms 23 and 231 to provide reservation for Muslim.
verdict is third setback for State
Justice Meena Kumari of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, who partly agreed with the decision of the Chief Justice to strike down Muslim reservations, rendered her verdict separately. She declared that the government has the power to refer to the BC Commission for identifying backward classes to provide reservation to socially and educationally backward classes.
Justice B. Prakash Rao and Justice D.S.R. Varma totally differed with the majority opinion. Justice Varma said he would pass orders soon by citing reasons for dismissal of the writs filed against the Act.
Justice Prakash Rao said that he would confine himself to answering the references made by the five-member bench which had dealt earlier with the same petition.
This is the third setback for the state government on the issue.
In 2004, the AP High Court had struck down a government order providing five per cent reservations to Muslims.
In 2005, the government issued Ordinance 13 and subsequently enacted a Bill. These were also struck down by the High Court. The government moved an SLP against the verdict in Supreme Court which is pending.
The Act struck down on Monday was enacted in 2007. This Act had been stayed by the High Court and the apex court suspended the stay on an appeal by the state government.
In the main, the court faulted the BC Commission for relying on surveys which were unscientific and irrational and not carried out for the purpose of enumerating backwardness among Muslims.
The BC Commission carried out its own survey but the court found that it was “not sufficient,” and the report is “not based on real facts, data or analysis and is without proper survey.” The commission had limited its survey to six districts within three days.
The court also pointed out that “the legislature ought to have taken care, while making the enactment, to define the word ‘Muslim’ and the phrase ‘other Muslim groups’ and state clearly as to who actually falls within these definitions, for enjoying the benefits under the Act.”
The court was dealing with a petition filed by an advocate, Mr Muralidhar Rao, and a student, Ms Tejasri. Another advocate, Mr K. Kondala Rao, and several other individuals and organisations filed petitions challenging and in favour of the legislation.
Justice Anil R. Dave declared that the recommendations set out in the report of the AP Backward Commission submitted on July 2, 2007, are unsustainable as it failed to spell out relevant criteria for identification of social and educational backwardness and inadequate representation in public employment among classes of persons belonging to the Muslim community.
He pointed out that the commission failed in obtaining the population figure of several classes, groups belonging to the Muslim community for inclusion of BC Group-E.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Andhra Pradesh DGP R R Girish Kumar gets a reprieve
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb. 5: The AP High Court on Friday suspended an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal which had set aside the appointment of Mr R.R. Girish Kumar as director-general of police.
The tribunal had on January 28 set aside as “illegal and arbitrary” the appointment of Mr Kumar, and directed the government to appoint a new DGP within two weeks. The tribunal had passed orders on petitions filed by the former DGPs, Mr A.K. Mohanty and Mr S.S.P. Yadav.
The CAT order was suspended by a division bench comprising Justice V. Eswaraiah and Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar. The judges suspended the operation of the CAT order till the final disposal of the government’s petition.
The court prima facie agreed with the contention of the government that the state has the power to create a post. The judges did not agree with the contention of Mr Yadav that his transfer to the APSRTC tantamounts to a reversion.
The tribunal had directed the government to release the due amounts to both Mr Mohanty and Mr Yadav as they were transferred to low payscale posts. The court said the pay attached to the DGP in the apex scale was allowable only as long as the incumbent held the post.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Tribunal for status quo on certificates of teachers
By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb. 1: The Andhra Pradesh administrative tribunal directed the state government to maintain status quo on the order passed by the commissioner of school education and revert about 400 teachers across the state.
The commissioner passed an order on January 23 directing the district educational officers not to consider the certificates issued by Vinayaka Mission University, Salem, Tamil Nadu and Janardhan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth Deemed University, Rajasthan for employment, academic purposes and consequent proceedings.
These universities were offering PG courses through the distant education mode. The commissioner issued the direction based on a report given by the Higher Educational Council in July 2009 informing the school education department that the UGC had not recognised the degrees awarded by these universities. The report said that the UGC has not recognised the ex-post facto approval given by the Distant Education Council to the academic programmes of these universities.
However, Mr N. Satyanarayana and 57 other school assistants of Nalgonda district approached the APAT against the orders of the commissioner.
Senior counsel Mr S. Ramachandra Rao, while arguing before Mr Suresh Reddy, judicial member of the tribunal, on behalf of the petitioners, contended that the UGC has not mentioned in its proceedings issued on June 14, 2009 that it had not recognised the degrees awarded by the above universities.
He further contended that the ministry of human resources department issued a Gazette Notification in 1995, declaring that the qualifications awarded through distant education mode are recognised for employment to the posts and services under the Central government.
Referring to the latest decision of the Centre to de-recognise 44 deemed universities including government universities in the country, Mr Rao said that the Supreme Court stayed the operation of the proposed action till final disposal.
He argued that in the said circumstances, the impugned action was highly illegal, unjust and unwarranted. While granting interim order, the tribunal issued notices to the respondents.
AP asked to dispose OMC plea on ores
The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday directed the state government to dispose of an application filed by the Bellary Iron Ore Private Limited seeking permission to lift iron ore lying in its stockyard.
Justice Gopalakrishna Tamada while dealing with a petition of the company granted three weeks to the authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.
It may be mentioned that the state government had issued an order recently restraining six mining companies from operations including transportation of iron ore.
The Obulapuram Mining Company challenged the government’s action before the High Court and though the order of the government was suspended, the Supreme Court stayed the same.
NGO’s plea on tribal rights admitted
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Anil R. Dave and Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy of the High Court on Monday admitted a public interest writ petition filed by Sakti, a non-governmental organisation working for tribal welfare.
The petitioner complained to the court that the law regarding protection of rights of tribals over forest lands is being defeated. The NGO while seeking a direction not to evict forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes, alleged that the whole process of recognition and vesting of forest lands is reversed by making the tribe an applicant and the authorities granting rights rather than recognising and identifying the tribe and vesting the forest rights on the basis of the official documents.
The petitioner further alleged that the authorities failed to enumerate the community lands and the present action would jeopardise the interests of all the 33 tribal communities in the area. The court granted four weeks to the authorities to respond.
HC seeks info on tender conditions
Justice N.V. Ramana of the High Court directed authorities to file an affidavit on alleged violation of tender conditions pertaining to 11 works of road widening and repairs in Khammam district under the Left Wing Extremist Area Project.
The judge was dealing with the petitions filed by one Mr K. Ramakrishna of Kisans Projects Pvt. Ltd., and two others complaining that the officials of the Roads and Buildings department had violated conditions imposed in the tender notification issued by the government on November 20.
Hyderabad, Feb. 1: The Andhra Pradesh administrative tribunal directed the state government to maintain status quo on the order passed by the commissioner of school education and revert about 400 teachers across the state.
The commissioner passed an order on January 23 directing the district educational officers not to consider the certificates issued by Vinayaka Mission University, Salem, Tamil Nadu and Janardhan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth Deemed University, Rajasthan for employment, academic purposes and consequent proceedings.
These universities were offering PG courses through the distant education mode. The commissioner issued the direction based on a report given by the Higher Educational Council in July 2009 informing the school education department that the UGC had not recognised the degrees awarded by these universities. The report said that the UGC has not recognised the ex-post facto approval given by the Distant Education Council to the academic programmes of these universities.
However, Mr N. Satyanarayana and 57 other school assistants of Nalgonda district approached the APAT against the orders of the commissioner.
Senior counsel Mr S. Ramachandra Rao, while arguing before Mr Suresh Reddy, judicial member of the tribunal, on behalf of the petitioners, contended that the UGC has not mentioned in its proceedings issued on June 14, 2009 that it had not recognised the degrees awarded by the above universities.
He further contended that the ministry of human resources department issued a Gazette Notification in 1995, declaring that the qualifications awarded through distant education mode are recognised for employment to the posts and services under the Central government.
Referring to the latest decision of the Centre to de-recognise 44 deemed universities including government universities in the country, Mr Rao said that the Supreme Court stayed the operation of the proposed action till final disposal.
He argued that in the said circumstances, the impugned action was highly illegal, unjust and unwarranted. While granting interim order, the tribunal issued notices to the respondents.
AP asked to dispose OMC plea on ores
The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday directed the state government to dispose of an application filed by the Bellary Iron Ore Private Limited seeking permission to lift iron ore lying in its stockyard.
Justice Gopalakrishna Tamada while dealing with a petition of the company granted three weeks to the authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.
It may be mentioned that the state government had issued an order recently restraining six mining companies from operations including transportation of iron ore.
The Obulapuram Mining Company challenged the government’s action before the High Court and though the order of the government was suspended, the Supreme Court stayed the same.
NGO’s plea on tribal rights admitted
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Anil R. Dave and Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy of the High Court on Monday admitted a public interest writ petition filed by Sakti, a non-governmental organisation working for tribal welfare.
The petitioner complained to the court that the law regarding protection of rights of tribals over forest lands is being defeated. The NGO while seeking a direction not to evict forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes, alleged that the whole process of recognition and vesting of forest lands is reversed by making the tribe an applicant and the authorities granting rights rather than recognising and identifying the tribe and vesting the forest rights on the basis of the official documents.
The petitioner further alleged that the authorities failed to enumerate the community lands and the present action would jeopardise the interests of all the 33 tribal communities in the area. The court granted four weeks to the authorities to respond.
HC seeks info on tender conditions
Justice N.V. Ramana of the High Court directed authorities to file an affidavit on alleged violation of tender conditions pertaining to 11 works of road widening and repairs in Khammam district under the Left Wing Extremist Area Project.
The judge was dealing with the petitions filed by one Mr K. Ramakrishna of Kisans Projects Pvt. Ltd., and two others complaining that the officials of the Roads and Buildings department had violated conditions imposed in the tender notification issued by the government on November 20.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)