Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday entertained a Central Government writ appeal on the question as to whether the High Court could direct renewal of a passport for 10 years without reference to the pending criminal case against the applicant. Earlier, a single judge had directed the passport authorities to pass appropriate orders on the application filed by Mahendra Kumar Agarwal for renewal of his passport for ten years without referring to a criminal case registered by the Madhapur police. Deputy solicitor-general Praveen Kumar argued that the single judge ought to have appreciated that in exercise the power under Section 22A of the Passport Act, a notification was issued which stated that a person against whom criminal case proceedings are pending has to obtain permission from magistrate concerned before travelling. Senior counsel B.S. Prasad, appearing for Agarwal, contended that the court had not pass any order of taking cognisance of the matter. In that scenario, not renewing the passport infringed on the applicant’s fundamental rights. The panel on Tuesday accordingly modified the orders passed by the single judge, and directed that the applicant shall not leave the country without taking permission from the court concerned.
HC relief to Sirpur Paper Mills
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea alleging disruption in functioning of M/s. Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd by Lorry and Bus Owners Welfare Association. The judge was dealing with a plea filed by the company. It was the case of the petitioner that the company established in 1938 and engaged in the manufacture of paper and allied products, was one of the leading paper mills in the country. The petitioner contended that the members of Lorry & Bus Owners Welfare Association were individual lorry owners who undertook the transportation of the from the factory premises to various destinations at the agreed freight rates. The representatives of the association were demanding a steep hike in the freight charges, which was unreachable. The petitioner contended that the members of the association had disrupted the transport services for nearly 20 days in March which caused severe loss to the company. Earlier, a writ petition was filed by same petitioner when the lorries with finished product were not being permitted to move out of the mill premises and the High Court directed the deputy superintendent of police, Komaram Bheem Asifabad district, and the Kagaznagar station house officer to provide police aid to the petitioners for transportation of products of the petitioner by road through lorries from its factory premises beyond Sirpur town until further orders. Senior Counsel Vedula Srinivas appearing for the petitioner contended that the present writ petition was filed when the members of the association were not allowing the vehicles carrying raw material to deliver the same to the paper mills and were not allowing the empty lorries to move out from factory after delivery. Senior counsel argued that this would stop the production at the paper mills which would not only affect its business but also affect the livelihood of nearly 2,500 families that are dependent on the paper mills. Justice Vijaysen Reddy accordingly directed the Komaram Bheem Asifabad DSP Kagaznagar SHO to provide police aid for movement of trucks carrying the raw materials into the factory premises coming from various places and for outgoing of those trucks and against blocking in any manner at factory gate or township of the petitioner by illegally parking their vehicles.
Plea seeking relief dismissed
Justice T. Vinod Kumar of Telangana High Court dismissed a writ plea seeking compensation and employment due to the submergence of land of the petitioners as a result of seepage of water from 2012 from the northern ash ponds KTPS Phases 1 and 2. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by G. Rama Krishna and three others contending that their land was not usable for agricultural purposes since 2012. The petitioners alleged that despite several representations before the authorities, no compensation was paid to the petitioners. Counsel of the petitioners submitted a joint inspection report of a committee constituted by the district collector in pursuance of the court’s direction. The judge, after examining the report of the environment engineer, observed that the report indicated that the petitioners’ land was situated in low-lying areas and the water was flowing from the adjacent land due to their irrigation activities. The judge held that the submergence of petitioners’ land was due to activities in the adjacent land and, hence, the petitioners could not claim compensation stating that the event had been caused due to the seepage of water from the ash ponds. Accordingly, the judge dismissed the writ plea.