HC Keeps Lookout Circular for Cancer Researcher in Abeyance
Hyderabad: Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court stayed a lookout circular (LOC) issued against a cancer research scientist who had assured that he would cooperate in an ongoing investigation. The judge said Dr. had challenged the LOC in connection with an FIR registered by the Economic Offenses Wing Squad-VII, CCS, Hyderabad. Siva Kumar Sangarappan was hearing a writ petition filed by S. Sivalas. The petitioner sought a declaration that the authorities’ action in opening the LOC and restricting his international travel was illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, and sought cancellation of the circular. According to the applicant, he was a defendant in a lawsuit arising from disputes regarding the corporate capital share of a company of which he was a shareholder. After learning that the FIR had been registered, he approached the Supreme Court and was granted bail. It was argued that, given the protection already provided by the Court and its commitment, the continuation of the LOC was unnecessary.
2. No pause in Ameenpur land acquisition
Justice NV Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Thursday refused to grant interim relief in a writ petition challenging the action of land acquisition authorities to carry out a delimitation work affecting a convention hall located in Ameenpur. The objection was made on the grounds that the action in dispute was carried out without prior notice or without initiating the legal publication process. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Kandukuri Jagadeeswara Rao, attacking the action of the authorities for allegedly earmarking a portion of the convention hall building for acquisition without following the procedure prescribed under the law. It was claimed that the process took place without any newspaper publication or public announcement. The petitioner alleged that such action was ex facie arbitrary, illegal and violated the legal safeguards governing land acquisition transactions. The attorney stated that the petitioner’s only source of income was the convention hall and expressed good faith concern that coercive actions, including demolition of the structure, could be carried out over the weekend unless the court intervened. Considering the legal situation, the court was not inclined to grant interim protection immediately. The court directed the authorities to seek instructions and posted the case for hearing on Monday.
3. Inspectors challenge promotion rules
A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court, while hearing the challenge to the validity of the amended eligibility criteria, refused to stay the promotions proposed under the amended Government of Telangana Life Insurance Civil Service Rules, 2025. A panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin was hearing a writ plea filed by D. Anjaneyulu and five others, investigators at the Insurance Directorate. The petitioners challenged Rule 6(2)(1) of the Government of Telangana Life Insurance Civil Service Rules, as amended in 2025. The petitioners’ case was that the amended rule provided for a degree qualification along with three years of experience in the supervisory staff for promotion; this was against the cardinal rules and violated the Constitution. The panel observed that there were candidates who remained eligible for promotion despite the amended framework and therefore no urgency arose to halt the promotion process. The bench made it clear that any promotion, if effected during the pendency of the writ plea, would be subject to the final outcome of the case and observed that the petitioners would be at liberty to seek appropriate remedies in case they were individually aggrieved by any decision on promotion.
