Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ appeal filed by Maha Hotel Projects Private Limited and upheld the consent of state government for change in control of the company under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, while confirming costs of ₹10 lakh. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin was dealing with an appeal against an order dismissing the writ petition of the company and imposition of costs. It was pointed out that the dispute arose after the state empowered committee (tourism) granted a no-objection certificate to the successful resolution applicant, enabling transfer of shareholding and control of Golden Jubilee Hotels Pvt. Ltd, executing the venture. It was contended that the project began in 2005 as a public private partnership for development of a five-star hotel at Madhapur in Hyderabad, after financial distress and classification of the loan account of the company as a non performing asset, insolvency proceedings were initiated before the National Company Law Tribunal in 2018. It was contended that a resolution plan approved in 2020 provided for change in control, subject to state consent, which was granted in September 2025 with certain conditions.
The panel observed that the IBC has overriding effect over all other laws and that an approved resolution plan was binding on all stakeholders, including shareholders. It observed that the appellant, being a shareholder, had no independent or vested right in the project since the rights belonged to the corporate entity. The extinguishment of its interest was a consequence of the insolvency process and not a violation of constitutional protections under Article 300A. The court also rejected the contention that the state granted the project without public tender, clarifying that consent was only an enabling step in furtherance of the approved resolution plan and not a fresh grant of state largesse.
It further held that the conditions imposed by the state formed part of a commercial arrangement and did not modify the approved plan. Noting that similar issues was litigated in earlier proceedings up to the Supreme Court, the panel remarked that the present appeal was an attempt to re agitate settled matters. Finding no merit in the challenge, the court directed the appellant to deposit ₹10 lakh with the Telangana Legal Services Authority.
Court injunction is not a shield: HC
Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court ruled that a civil court injunction cannot be used as a shield to continue statutory licences, and that the authorities must independently verify lawful possession before granting or renewing licences. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Andela Vijaya Laxmi and others, owners of premises in Domalguda, Hyderabad, questioning the action of the Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO) in deferring a decision on renewal of an LPG licence in favour of an existing distributor.
The petitioners contended that the tenancy was terminated and that the distributor no longer had lawful possession of the property, a mandatory requirement under the Explosives Act, 1884 and the Gas Cylinders Rules, 2016. It was pointed out that the distributor obtained an injunction from a civil court restraining dispossession except by due process of law. Justice Nagesh observed that such an order did not confer legal possession for the purpose of statutory licensing, nor can it override requirements under special enactments governing safety and regulation. Holding that the authorities erred in treating the licence as continuing merely because of the subsisting injunction, the court found that they had failed to exercise their statutory duty.
It emphasised that the licensing authority must determine whether the applicant satisfies the condition of “legal and physical possession” based on law and available material, irrespective of pending civil disputes. Setting aside the proceedings of February 5, 2026, the court directed the authorities to reconsider the issue of licence renewal in accordance with law and without being influenced by the civil court injunction. It further directed that no LPG storage or distribution be permitted at the premises without a valid licence.
Plea alleges death in fake encounter
Justice N. Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea concerning allegations of a fake police encounter and a claim for compensation arising out of the death of a youth in Medak district. The writ petition was filed by Ramulu Naik and another, alleging that the police forcibly took son of the petitioner from Maharashtra and killed him in the early hours between villages in Kangti mandal, falsely implicating him in the death of a police constable.
It was contended that the act amounted to a custodial killing and a violation of fundamental rights, and the petitioner sought an independent investigation into the alleged fake encounter. The plea sought registration of a criminal case under provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the SC/ST Atrocities Act against the officials involved, grant of ex gratia compensation of ₹10 lakh, withdrawal of cases against family members, and provision of government employment to the bereaved family.
The respondent authorities contended that the allegations of a fake encounter are not sustainable and disputed the claims made by the petitioners. The judge posted the matter for further hearing, with the issue of compensation remaining under consideration.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
