Telangana High Court Extends Interim Protection To DIG Abhishek Mohanty; Retains Him In Telangana

Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court granted interim protection to deputy inspector general of police Abhishek Mohanty and directed that his services be retained in the state until the next hearing. A bench comprising Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda accepted Mohanty’s fresh writ plea challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) orders regarding his allocation between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner challenged the CAT order, which was decided on February 12 along with relevant communications and orders. The origin of the dispute stemmed from the cadre allocation process carried out under the AP Reorganization Act, 2014. It was submitted that the guidelines framed on the recommendations of the Pratyush Sinha committee were given legal force and the allocation of All India Service officers was earlier the subject of extensive litigation before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Supreme Court. The petitioner felt that the allocation should be made in accordance with the approved guidelines, taking into account factors such as option exercised, residence, seniority and equitable distribution. Previous judicial decisions have guided the reconsideration of individual complaints while also confirming the validity of the guidelines. It was alleged that the CAT did not do such a practice while rejecting the petitioner’s claim. The bench observed that an earlier division bench had allowed the petitioner to continue in Telangana as he continued to discharge his duties in the state despite the adverse order of the CAT; The court extended interim protection and directed that his services will continue to be retained in Telangana till the next date of hearing. The matter was sent to July 1 for hearing.

Pre-arrest bail in assault case

The Telangana High Court granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of assaulting sarpanch Guvvala Shirisha’s father-in-law in a post-election dispute in Suryapet district. The judge was dealing with the criminal complaint filed by Pingali Srinivasa Reddy, who is accused of an offense registered at Kodad Rural police station. According to the prosecution, after the complainant’s daughter-in-law was elected sarpanch, an argument broke out between rival groups. It was alleged that the complainant was caught by the defendants on the night of March 31, chased, taken out of his hiding place and beaten with sticks, causing serious injuries, including suspected fractures. The petitioner’s lawyer argued that he was falsely implicated in the crime and was not present at the scene of the crime. It was claimed that the applicant had serious health problems, had hip replacement surgery in 2022 and could not stand on his own. Medical records were presented to the court to verify the claim. The prosecution drew attention to the statement of the complainant, who stated that the complainant was present at the scene. Taking into account the applicant’s situation, the court decided on pre-arrest bail.

Plea said that the women’s quota was not respected

Justice N. Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to be issued in a writ petition challenging the election of executive members to the Kukatpally Bar Association on the grounds that reservations for women were not followed. Anupama Kolluri, who filed the writ petition, claimed that despite receiving the highest number of votes among female candidates, the two posts reserved for women were not filled in accordance with the 33 per cent reservation requirement. It was observed that the respondents did not take into consideration the request for reservation to the executive member category and re-evaluation of the election results. The petitioner alleged that the selection process did not comply with the rules of the reservation association and a man was selected for the post even though it was reserved for women. The petitioner stated that the case should be concluded as soon as possible since the term of office of an elected member of the association is one year and a month has passed since the elections. The judge stated that the judicial process takes time and sent the matter to April 30.