Hyderabad: A two judge panel of the Telangana High Court ruled that an intra-court appeal against an interim order passed in the course of a criminal investigation was not maintainable. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and G.M. Mohiuddin dismissed at the threshold an appeal filed by Operation Mobilisation India Trust. The appeal was filed challenging an interim order that restrained the trust from alienating its immovable properties pending investigation into alleged financial irregularities. Earlier a writ petition was filed by Gowripaga Albert seeking a probe into alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act and the Prevention of Corruption Act, with a request to entrust the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
In this petition, a single judge directed maintenance of status quo with respect to immovable properties of the trust. Assailing this, the appellant contended that the interim order was beyond the scope of the writ petition and contrary to prior directions of the Supreme Court, which were confined to freezing of accounts for institutional expenses and did not extend to restraint on alienation of properties. Rejecting the contention, the panel observed that the core issue in the writ petition pertained to allegations of financial irregularities attracting penal consequences under the FCRA framework, thereby placing the matter squarely within the domain of criminal jurisdiction. It held that an interim order passed in such proceedings did not warrant intervention in intra-court appellate jurisdiction. Accordingly, the panel dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.
Benefits denied from 1991: HC warns of action
Warning of coercive action for non-compliance with judicial directions, the Telangana High Court cautioned senior irrigation department officials in a contempt case concerning denial of service benefits to a retired employee from 1991.
Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao was dealing with contempt proceedings initiated by P. Lakshminarayana alleging wilful disobedience of earlier directions granting monetary benefits from the date of regularisation of his services. The petitioner had earlier approached the High Court in 2019 contending that although his services stood regularised with effect from November 16 1991, monetary benefits from that date were denied, while similarly situated juniors received such benefits. Allowing the writ petition, the court declared the denial illegal and recognised the entitlement of the petitioner. Alleging non-compliance with the order, the petitioner initiated contempt proceedings against the principal secretary, irrigation and command area development department, and other officials.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the directions remained unimplemented wantonly. Taking serious note of the continued inaction, the court made it clear that in the absence of compliance, the principal secretary would be directed to appear in person.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
