Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Saturday directed the Director General of Police to immediately ascertain the whereabouts of Chandan Misra, a Maoist, and his wife and produce them before the jurisdictional magistrate by 10.30 am on January 27. The order came on a habeas corpus petition filed by Prof. Gaddam Laxman, president of Civil Liberties Committee, by way of house motion before a panel comprising of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Madhusudhan Rao Bobbili Ramaiah. The petitioner alleged that Misra, detenue No. 1, was taken away by the Jagadgirigutta police at about 9 pm on January 24. His wife Rapaka Swathy, detenue No. 2, was subsequently taken away by the police from her home at Srinivasa Colony, Jagadgirigutta, Rangareddy district. Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the brother of detenue No. 2, Kranthi, was an eyewitness. The petitioner said that the persons who took away both the detenues were in plain clothes but described themselves as policemen when asked by the detenue No.2 about their identity and the detenue were taken away by the police in a white car with the registration number AP 1341. It was contended that the detenue No. 2 was a home-maker and is not a Maoist and that more than 24 hours had passed since both the detenues were taken away by the police. Detenue No. 2 was incommunicado, i.e., not traceable on phone after 10 pm on January 24. The special government pleader argued that there was no evidence of the persons who took both the detenues away being policemen. He contended that Srinivasa Colony, Jagadgiri Gutta, is a congested area and the petition did not give any particular address of the house from which the detenues were taken away. Hence, the police had not been able to locate the house or gather any information. He argued that detenue No. 1 was the third accused in a crime registered in Andhra Pradesh (30 of 2018) and as the writ petition was served in the evening the respondents could not make any headway with regard to the incident. The panel observed that SHO, Jagadgirigutta, was present online but was unable to make submissions apparently in view of a technical glitch. The panel after hearing the parties and considering the statements made in writ petition including the apprehension of an encounter killing by the police of the detenue No.1, said, “we are of the view that the respondents, particularly the respondent No. 3, being in-charge of the law and order situation in the particular colony/area and district, cannot have any basis to say that the respondents do not have any information with regard to the incident.” The panel further said, “considering the admitted facts of both the detenues being untraceable for more than 24 hours, the respondents not having any information with regard to either of the detenues after 24 hours and the admitted fact of both the detenues being taken away as witnessed by the brother of the detenue No.2, we deem it fit to direct the respondent No. 2, the DGP, to immediately ascertain the whereabouts of both the detenues, trace them and produce them before the jurisdictional magistrate by 10.30 am on 27.01.2025 and file a report in compliance of the directions which shall be placed before us on 27.01.2025.” The panel directed the DGP to cause an enquiry and ascertain the truth of the statement that detenue No. 1 was an accused in a crime registered in Andhra Pradesh. The panel further recorded that, “We may add that it is not acceptable that the respondents who are the law keepers of the state would feign ignorance of the incident where two persons have disappeared without trace or the inability to trace them even after 24 hours.” The panel also directed to state to provide sufficient protection to the eye-witness. The matter will now be heard on Monday.
2. Education Society obtains status quo order in HYDRAA case
Justice K. Lakshman of Telangana High Court directed the HYDRAA and other authorities to maintain the status quo in respect of a piece of land located in Old Alwal under the GHMC. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Palla Narsimham Memorial Educational Society, which alleged that the authorities were interfering with its peaceful possession of open plots. The petitioner claimed ownership of the land based on a gift settlement deed and had obtained building permission. The petitioner argued that construction could not proceed due to disputes regarding the layout. It was alleged that GHMC constructed a compound wall on the land without following the due process of law. The petitioner contended that the authorities’ interference was illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the Constitution. The sought a directive to prevent further disturbances and to ensure the society’s uninterrupted possession of the plots. During the hearing, the judge questioned how the sub-registrar proceeded with the registration of sale deeds without verifying the authenticity of the layout. The judge expressed difficulty in determining whether the layout was genuine or not. The GHMC reportedly undertook the construction of a compound wall to secure the park area, allegedly at the request of HYDRAA. Meanwhile, petitioner’s counsel presented a sale deed to challenge the construction. Upon receipt of a complaint, the deputy commissioner conducted an inspection and found that, as per the gram panchayat layout, the land in question was designated as open space. However, the petitioner is reportedly claiming ownership of the property, allegedly by manipulating the layout. The authorities argued that the petitioner was attempting to encroach upon park land. After hearing the arguments, the judge directed the petitioner to submit all relevant documents and linked records to the respondent authorities. The respondents have been instructed to review the documents and issue orders within four weeks in accordance with the law.
3. Milk to Anganwadi Centers tender under challenge
Justice T. Madhavi Devi of Telangana High Court will decide a writ plea challenging the actions of the Telangana Dairy Development Cooperative Federation Limited, in not finalising the tenders issued for the transportation of milk to anganwadi centres in 33 districts of the state. The judge took on file a writ plea filed by Sri Laxmi Narsimha Swamy Traders who alleged that the respondent authorities were not finalising tenders issued for five districts in respect of supply of pack milk to 35,700 anganwadi centres. Standing counsel appearing for the respondent authorities appraised the judge of the bids received by the respondents and pointed out that the that price quoted by the petitioner was higher than another bidder. It was also contended that several negotiations took place between the petitioner and the respondent department, however, as the petitioner failed to quote a lower price, he did not get the tender. The standing counsel informed the judge that the average of quote for nine districts was taken while determining the price. Counsel for the petitioner strongly contested the average methodology adopted by the respondent authorities and pointed out that the same did not find any place in the tender notice. The counsel for the petitioner argued that even though the respondents took out different tender notices for all districts, but are now consolidating and averaging price without stating in the tender notice. The judge questioned the standing counsel for the respondents as to why the average methodology was being followed as against taking the lowest price in respect of each district. The standing counsel stated that the tender will not specify commercial bid as it is the decision of the respondent department. It was also brought to the notice of the judge that the earnest money deposit of the petitioner was returned and that stopping the tender at this stage would cause prejudice. After hearing the parties at length, the judge directed to the respondent authorities to file their response and required the respondents to state their rationale for averaging. While the judge was not inclined to stay the tender, it is made clear that the tender will be subject to the outcome of a writ petition.
