KCR, Harish Move HC to Ask

They claimed that the commission was appointed by the congress government with the intention of Malafide. Investigation Commission, the leader of the investigation commission headed by Justice Ghose, the irrigation secretary, the investigation commission that intervened in both written petitions.

Chandrashekar Rao questioned the scope and authority of the secretary to give judicial powers to an investigation commission and thus giving the authority to correct responsibilities’ for the alleged tours. When these illegal powers are used in a claimed way, the commission has taken responsibility on a large number of individuals, including itself, and the Chandrashekar RAO, which is specified in the petition, requested the recovery of the funds paid to the execution agencies.

The petition owners claimed that the report had made prejudiced, illegal, high -hand, inadequate, slander and scary observations and findings against them.

ChandraShekar Rao, who accused the Ghose directly, called Mala Fide as a witness, and then prepared a report that made scary statements about his term of office. He said that this was deliberately done without giving a compulsory section 8-B notification when a person’s reputation is in danger.

The Commission misleaded him, claimed that Chandrashekar Rao claimed, and rejected himself the opportunity to defend himself. Using the Commission report, he accused the authorities of the image of the image of the authorities of the media, and subject him to a media attempt.

The petition owners also claimed that the government had announced it over and over again without making a copy. In order to claim that the commission reports were recommended in nature and that such reports were left aside by high courts around the country, they referred to the Supreme Court Decisions, including ‘Bihar Province etc. Lal Kishan Advani (2003)’.

The petition owners complained about the press conference conducted by the Prime Minister and other ministers. They said that the media houses had launched a “most vicious, open, malicious, scientific, scientific and continuous attack in order to damage the reputation of Chandrashekar Rao and to impress his stance in a prejudicial manner.

The petition claimed that the authorities and political bosses have initiated the media attack only to get an unnecessary advantage in the next local organ elections and to reduce the reputation of Chandrashekar Rao and the public character.

HC attracts taxors for procedural tours

Haydarabad: On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of TaLangana, holding the taxpayers responsible for forcing them to look for judicial intervention, increased government tax officials for repeated procedures. The court expressed a strong discontent with the inefficiency of the department and called it the “official abuse” case.

A section of the Council of Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Gm Mohiuddin felt a petition for more than one tax notification opened by Sri Venkateshwara dairy products for the same financial year in accordance with the law-19-Telangana goods and Service Tax (TGST) law. The court observed that it is still deprived of clarity in the implementation of civil servants.

Draft policy to solve ftl disagreements: HC

Hyderabad: On Tuesday, the Telangana Supreme Court underlined an urgent need for a comprehensive government policy to address long -term disputes, including the full tank level (FTL), bumper zones and natural drainage channels (Nalas).

Justice B. Vijaysen Redy, a series of petitions, by the authorities by expressing a strong confirmation on long -term inertia, questioning the ongoing delay in solving such issues questioned. “The authorities will drag these cases and waste the time of the court, Yakın judge asked, pointing to administrative inertia, which has left the problems of key land ownership that has not been solved for decades.

The court emphasized a remarkable contradiction: While the Revenue Department continued to publish road books, the irrigation department claimed that the same land fell under FTL, buffer zone or drainage channels. Justice Redy, “Even after decades, the facts have not been determined,” he said. “If the land is part of a water flow channel, how did Paso books published?”

The observations arrived on a petition opened by Palle Narasimha Reddy from Kacheguda during a hearing, and an order was given to the demolition of a compound wall in Jawaharnagar by the Irrigation Department’s assistant manager. Demolition aimed to facilitate the flow of drainage and sewage water, which Redy claimed to damage its territory.

While refusing to provide temporary assistance, the court directed the participants to a firm file against an Affidavit and postponed the issue to September 9th.

He tells HC State to pay for purchasing in 75

Hyderabad: In 1975, Justice Nv Shravan Kumar, the Supreme Court of TaLangana, who benefited from a land parcel that belonged to a temple in 1975, directed the state government to complete and pay compensation within four months.

The judge was engaged in a petition by a writer’s petition made by Sri Balaji Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devasthanam. The land was wanted. Annapureddipalli – Until 1975 to Chaparralapalli. Even after a few representations since 1980, no compensation has been paid.

In 1984, the roads and buildings (R&B) department wrote to the temple that the road endured by Zilla Parishad officials and compensation was the responsibility of ZP.

The Government Advisor of the Foundation Department, Bhukya Mangilal Naik, argued that the issue is 50 years and that despite the previous instructions for new purchasing on the new purchasing of the Supreme Court, Rehabilitation and Re -Settlement Law, in despite previous instructions for new acquisitions about fair compensation and transparency. Even a new representation made by the temple in December 2022 remained careless.

The government called four months to complete the land acquisition process. Justice Shravan Kumar, who recorded the applications, observed that the authorities were dependent on previous court decisions and warned that incompatibility would invite civil disrespect.

Accordingly, the court directed the Chief Secretary and Chief Engineer of the R&B department, Khammam Regional Collector and other authorities to complete the purchase process and pay compensation to the temple without delay.