Hyderabad: A two Judge bench of the Telangana High Court comprising Justice M.S. Ramachandran Rao and Justice K. Lakshman on Thursday ruled that the Telangana government will pay pension and other retirement benefits to employees of the erstwhile AP Housing Board. The controversy relates to the stance by the A.P Government that 96 per cent of the assets of the erstwhile housing board remained with the Telangana government. On the other hand, the Telangana government said the payment should be in accordance with the statutory proportion of 52:48. Speaking for the bench, Justice M.S Ramchandra Rao ruled that the Telangana government shall pay all the amounts due, including revised pension. The bench took note of the fact that the Sheela Bhide Committee had not yet submitted its report qua the Housing board. The bench therefore directed the payment subject to later apportionment of dues by the respective governments.
Benefits for widows:
The Green bench of the High Court comprising Justice A. Rajasekhar Reddy and Justice P. Naveen Rao reserved its verdict on whether widows were entitled to rehabilitation and resettlement. The court was dealing with pleas challenging the stance of the government that a widow living with her children or other legal representatives of her late husband was not entitled to such benefit. An appeal from a widow from Vemulaghat village came up before the bench, contending that lands for Kaleshwaram project were under submersion and she was entitled to rehabilitation and resettlement benefits in accordance with the new Land Acquisition Act, 2013. The government, however, interpreted Section (3)(d) of the Act as excluding widows who is not deserted and have other family members who are beneficiaries of the scheme of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act.
A two judge bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice A Abhishek Reddy admitted a contempt appeal filed by Ashok Naik, CI of police. Earlier, a single judge had sentenced the police officer with one month imprisonment and also issued directions for disciplinary action against him. In a petition filed by resident of Sanjeev Reddy Nagar it was complained that the police acted contrary to the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar which requires the police to give a notice to any accused and follow certain guidelines before actually effecting arrest. The Supreme Court also permitted the High Court to proceed with contempt case against officers who do not follow various guidelines issued by the apex court. The single judge in exercise of such power punished the CI. The Contempt of Courts Act provides for a statutory appeal against the conviction which the petitioner has availed.
The same bench of the High Court adjourned the writ petition challenging G.O. 49 of May, 2018 and a consequential notification relating to recruitment of police constables. Petitioner Chanvalli Srikanth and two others filed the plea challenging the weightage given to candidates having driving licence for light motor vehicles or transport with badge number or heavy motor vehicle HMV licence with two years experience as unjust and discriminatory. The bench referred the case to a full bench, which is considering the question of law on awarding default weightage according to the said government order. It said this writ petition cannot be decided until the full bench decides the question of law.