Clear Hyderabad’s footpaths, says court

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 30: The AP High Court on Monday ordered that criminal law be invoked against those encroaching upon footpaths in the city.

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar directed the GHMC and the roads and buildings department to deal with encroachers with a tough hand by invoking provisions of criminal law against them.

The High Court was acting on a letter written by a Secunderabad resident, Brig. (retd) Virender P. Sharma to the Chief Justice, which the court had taken up as a petition.

Brig. Sharma had complained about the poor maintenance of roads and lack of pavements whenever roads were widened. The authorities had also failed to check illegal occupation of existing pavements. This was leaving no place for pedestrians to walk.

During the course of the hearing, the Chief Justice asked GHMC counsel about the action against pavement encroachers in the twin cities. Counsel replied that civil cases had been booked against them.

The Chief Justice said that that would not have much impact, and directed the authorities to initiate action under the provisions of the Land Grabbing Act and also under criminal law.

The bench directed the GHMC to submit an action taken report after four weeks, and explain the steps being taken for removal of encroachments from pavements and also constructing of pavements where they don't exist.

Won’t evict without rehabilitation, says vendors

Hyderabad: Reacting to the judgement, former minister Nayani Narasimha Reddy, president of the Twin Cities Hawkers Association, said that they would implead themselves in the case.

He said that without providing rehabilitation to footpath vendors, the association would not allow either the GHMC or the government to evict petty vendors.

He said thousands of people were dependent on footpath vending, and the authorities cannot touch them without providing them an alternative means of livelihood.

He cautioned that forcible eviction by citing the court order would lead to law and order problems.

When contacted, GHMC commissioner Somesh Kumar said, “I have  not seen the court order, but we will consider all possible steps to make alternative arrangements for footpath vendors.”

He said, “We have to look into the Supreme Court directions with regard to street hawkers and also the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012 before proceeding further.”

High Court smells a rat in project approval

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 27 : The AP High Court on Thursday expressed doubts about the chief secretary’s signature on a note produced by the state government pertaining to Cabinet proceedings in granting approval to a water scheme in Chittoor, Chief Minister N. Kiran Kumar Reddy’s native district.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice K.J. Sengupta and Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao was dealing with a petition by Telangana Rashtrapati Samiti MLA T. Harish Rao against the Chief Minister, challenging the CM’s action in granting the water scheme to the district. The Chief Justice pointed out that the note did not seem to be in order with regard to the signature of the chief secretary.

The state government, on Thursday, had placed the Cabinet proceedings in a sealed cover. After perusing the note, the Chief Justice expressed his doubts to the counsel representing the Infrastructure Corporation of Andhra Pradesh (Incap), regarding the originality of the note.

After consulting with the joint secretary of the government present in court, the counsel replied that it was the original note of the Cabinet proceedings.

Not satisfied, the Chief Justice directed the chief secretary to file a sworn affidavit stating that the note was original and granted a week to submit the affidavit.

Harish Rao had challenged a GO issued on October 14, 2013 according administrative approval for Rs 4,300 crore for execution of a Rs 7,390 crore drinking water supply project.

Telangana Rashtra Samiti MLA T. Harish Rao had, in his petition, contended that there was no Cabinet approval for the water scheme in Chittoor as the entire Cabinet was divided on regional lines and there was no possibility of securing approval and funds from either the state Cabinet or Assembly for the Chittoor project.

On December 18, the state government had submitted before the court that the Cabinet had ratified the decision of the state government in granting administrative sanction, releasing of funds and awarding contract for the scheme. The bench had then directed that the proceedings be placed before it.

High Court questions land for political offices

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 24: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Tuesday directed the principal secretary to the revenue department to submit an affidavit explaining on what recommendations had land been allotted to various political parties.

The court impleaded the political parties who had got land from the government as respondents to the petition and issued notices.

A division Bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar was dealing with a petition by Nellore district resident V. Gopi Krishna, challenging a GO issued in 2009 to alienate 0.97 cents to the  District Congress Committee to construct its party office at East Gudur village in Gudur mandal of the district.

Principal secretary B.R. Meena appeared before the court following its direction and placed the details of alienation of land to various political parties in the districts and also in the state headquarters.

According to the details, the state government has allotted land to the Congress, BJP, Telugu Desam, CPM, Telangana Rashtra Samiti, CPI, Visalaandhra Vignana Samiti and the CPI-ML New Democracy Party at 16 places across the state.

The government has alienated most of the land at Rs 100 per square yard to the various parties, including the TRS at Road No. 12, Banjara Hills.

It was brought to the court’s notice that the land was given on lease to the TD and the BJP for a period of 30 years and in the remaining cases, land was alienated at concessional rates.

Cops who do not file FIRs to face disciplinary action

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 24 : Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy of the AP High Court on Monday directed the DGP to issue a circular to all police stations across the state to direct them that registration of FIR is mandatory and police officers avoiding the same would face disciplinary proceedings.

While imposing a fine of Rs 20,000 on Vizianagaram police for not registering a case, the judge directed the DGP to issue a circular and report compliance to the court after four weeks.

The judge was disposing a plea by T.V.G, Chandrasekhar challenging the inaction of the police in not registering a case till date despite his complaint in May 2009 at L Kota police station.

P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, counsel for the petitioner contended that in a recent direction of the apex court the police officer cannot avoid registering an offence and action must be taken against erring officers if information received by him discloses a cognisable offence.

The Vizianagaram police told the court that they had registered the case and prior to that they had conducted a preliminary inquiry into contents of the complaint. Expressing displeasure at the apathy of the police in registering cases, the judge said that the scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received, but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognisable offence.

Mantri in trouble for Osmania University arrest

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 25: Minister for civil supplies and legislative affairs D. Sridhar Babu has landed in a row for his alleged involvement in the detention and torture of Gaddam Sriram, an LLB student of Osmania University and leader of Telangana Students’ JAC.

Justice Ramesh Ranganathan of the AP High Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the minister seeking his version on the allegations made by V. Swaroopa in her petition seeking action against Babu and others for their involvement in the alleged illegal detention and torture of her husband Sriram.

V. Swaroopa, an M.Phil student at EFLU, Hyderabad, alleged that her husband Gaddam Sriram was detained by Karimnagar police on December 9 at the behest of minister D. Sridhar Babu. She said that the minister had a grudge against her husband for releasing a pamphlet containing alleged illegal activities of Babu and his followers.

According to the police, Sriram had alleged in the pamphlets that the minister had shares in a club in Hyderabad and had also encouraged rigging in the recently concluded gram panchayat elections.

Earlier, the judge had directed a medical examination of Sriram and a medical officers’ team of doctors from Care, Apollo and Nims had examined him and said that had a seven-day-old injury marks on his body and did not require hospitalisation. The police was told to file its counteraffidavit in a week.

The judge had then directed the Hyderabad police commissioner to shift him to the Chanchalguda Jail in the event of his discharge from NIMS.

V. Raghunath, the counsel for the petitioner, placed photographs of Sriram being chained by the police before being brought to NIMS for medical examination from Karimnagar.

Reacting to it, the judge asked the counsel for the Home Department the need for the police to behave in this manner. "What was the need to torture him? The police can register a case and investigate. Even the affected party may file a defamation case against him," he said.

He observed: "I would have stayed his arrest had the matter been at the initial stage. But since the case is with the lower court and the accused in judicial remand, I leave it to  the accused to seek justice from the court below."

The judge also issued notices to the DGP, Karimnagar SP and to the Godavarikhani police, directing them to file their counter affidavits within a week.

Return Padma Shri: Mohan Babu, Brahmanandam get HC stick

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 24 : Hyderabad: Telugu film actors M. Mohan Babu and Brahmanandam Kanneganti have landed in trouble for alleged misuse of their Padma Shri awards.

Mohan Babu was conferred the award in 2007, and Brahmanandam in 2009, in recognition of their services to the Telugu film industry.

The AP High Court on Monday faulted the actors for prefixing the name of the award to their names in the credits of the Telugu movie Denikaina Ready that was released in 2012.

Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta pointed out that it would be better for the actors to surrender their awards to the Centre in view of the allegation as gentlemen, and to uphold morals.

The Chief Justice, along with Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar, was dealing with a PIL filed by senior BJP leader N. Indrasena Reddy, who had challenged the alleged inaction of the Centre in not recommending to the President to annul the awards.

Mohan Babu’s counsel submitted that he was not responsible for the manner in which his name was featured in the film credits, and that it could be the producer who had done it.

When actor M. Mohan Babu’s counsel submitted that he was not responsible for prefixing ‘Padma Shri’ to their names in the credits of Telugu movie Denik-aina Ready, Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta noted that the film was produced by Twenty Four Frames Factory Pvt Ltd, owned by film actor M. Mohan Babu’s family and pulled up the parties for misleading the court. He said that the private firm is nothing but another form of a sole proprietary firm.

At one stage, Justice Sengupta said that if the respondents failed to rectify their fault, the court would proceed with investigation apart from calling for details from the Reg-istrar of Companies about the production house and seek details of tax return from the income tax department. The bench also cautioned that it would invoke IPC Section 177 (furnishing false information) against Mohan Babu and his company.

The CJ also wanted to know from counsel whet-her Mohan Babu had political affiliations. Counsel replied that he was with a political party (Telugu Desam) earlier. The CJ pointed out that the court believed that the actor might be very well aware of the consequences if the court proceeded in the case as the elections were near.

The bench in another stage decided to examine the both the actors and Gajendra Naidu, one of the directors of the production house, personally by ordering their presence, but the bench adjourned the matter till Monday next on the request of the counsels of Brahmanandam and Mohan Babu.

The Supreme Court while interpreting Article 18 of the Constitution in a case in 1996 had held that Nati-onal Award do not amount to ‘titles’ (within the meaning of Article 18 (1) of the Constitution), and they should not be used as suffixes or prefixes. If this was done the defaulter would forfeit the national award by following due procedure.

Based on the interpretation, the Union home ministry issued guidelines barring use of the award name as suffix or prefix to the award winner’s name on letterheads, invitation cards, posters, books etc.

No cash allowance or any facility/benefit in terms of concession etc. in rail/air travel is attached to these awards. Prior to issuance of guidelines it was a practice in the Telugu film industry to feature the name of the award with that of the award winner.

Nizam Mukarram Jah Trust for Education and Learning wins tax fight

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 19: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has put an end to a 30 year-old legal tangle between the trustees of the Nizam Mukarram Jah Trust for Education and Learning and the income-tax department by justifying an order of the I-T Appellate Tribunal setting aside the orders of the I-T commissioner to impose tax on the Trust.

There was a dispute between the Trust and the I-T department regarding tax on Kothi Asafia, known as King Koti Palace, from 1982.

The Trust had acquired the palace as an oral gift from Prince Mukarram Jah on December 29, 1972. He had got the property as inheritance after the death of his grandfather Nizam Osman Ali Khan and had to pay the estate duty owed by his grandfather.

The Andhra Pradesh government had acquired the King Koti palace under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and had taken possession on September 23, 1981, by awarding a compensation of Rs 30.19 lakh in 1983. The entire compensation was appropriated as estate duty.

The Trust in its assessment proceedings for the years 1982-83 and 1983-84, had claimed that it had not violated the provisions of Section 13 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act and, therefore, it was eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

The inspecting assistant commissioner had held that the Trust had not violated the provisions of the Act and extended the benefit to the Trust.

However, this decision was set aside by the I-T commissioner who held that the appropriation of the compensation amount was tantamount to application of the property of the Trust, and consequently provisions of Section 13 (1) (c) and Section 13 (3) were applicable.

While applying the above provisions, the commissioner had charged Rs 19,60,693 as tax on the capital gains arising from the transaction in the assessment year 1982-83 and 1983-84.

The order of the commissioner was set aside by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal and the matter was referred to the High Court in 1993.

After hearing the case, a division Bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice K.C. Bhanu justified the order of the tribunal.

Only 13.5% Telangana staff in judiciary

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 17: The Telangana judiciary will face a huge staff crunch after bifurcation because of the historically lower recruitment in the region.

According to the bifurcation Bill, the strength of the Telangana and the residuary state judiciary will be finalised based on population. This means the Telangana judiciary will get 42 per cent of the total jobs.

Statistics show that Telangana has only 13.5 per cent jobs in the High Court (see table), the rest going to Seemandhra.

The strength of the AP High Court judges is 49 while the present strength is 36, including the Chief Justice. Of these, six are from Telangana. After setting up the new High Court for Telangana, 19 to 21 judges will be required as per the population ratio.

The Bill indicates that employees who are about retire in two years after bifurcation will be given the option to continue in the state capital as it will be the common capital for 10 years.

According to sources, if the government continues with excess staff from Seemandhra after bifurcation, it would not only lead to litigation but also to unrest among judicial staff.

Telangana judicial officers were of the opinion that the proposal would hamper their employment opportunities as they were already deprived of their legitimate share of jobs.

Purushotham Reddy, president of the Telangana Employees Association of the High Court said, “A lot of injustice was done in recruitment and we will not tolerate this any longer.

We are actually eligible for 80 per cent but our strength is even less than the non-local quota. We are being treated as second class citizens.” 

Lawyers oppose common court

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 16: The issue of having a common High Court for Seemandhra and Telangana is likely to lead to another series of agitations by Telangana and Seemandhra advocates.

Lawyers from both the regions have been opposing the common court proposal by the Centre as the AP State Re-Organisation Bill -2013 has indicated that the existing High Court would be the common court for both the states till the establishment of a new state High Court for the residuary state.

The judges of the existing High Court will become judges of the common High Court as soon as the Bill came into force. The expenditure for salaries and allowances of the common High Court shall be divided among both the state.

The principal seat of the Andhra Pradesh HC shall be at the place notified by the President. A separate bar council for Telangana will be constituted and lawyers desirous of enrolling in the new council can do so within a year from the date of the constitution of the council.

After the constitution of a new High Court for the residuary state, the cases pending before the common High Court will be divided based on origin and place of litigation.

According to jurists, about 95 per cent of the cases can be allocated easily while it might be difficult to transfer cases where partition of properties is involved in both the states. It has to be decided by both the Chief Justices after due consultations.

Meanwhile, the Telangana HC Advocates’ Association has announced that the proposal of the common high court would be resisted tooth and nail.

According to S. Satyam Reddy, chairman of the Telangana Advocates’ JAC, they will not allow the continuation of the existing High Court as a common High Court for both the states.
The JAC has already represented to the chairman of the Group of Ministers for a separate High Court for Telangana.

Also, D.S.N.V. Prasad Babu, co-convener of Seemandhra Advocates Joint Action Committee, said that the proposal for a common High Court was a meaningless one.