Hyderabad: Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda of the Telangana High Court, sitting in vacation court, granted interim relief to two importers of multifunctional printing and scanning devices by allowing the provisional release of their goods, which were withheld by customs authorities. The panel passed the order while hearing two writ petitions filed by Arka Business Solutions and Glamex, both engaged in the import and sale of printing and photocopying equipment. The importers, who procured multifunctional devices (MFDs) from suppliers based in the UAE and Singapore, approached the court after the customs authorities denied clearance of the consignments, citing a lack of authorisation under the Foreign Trade Policy. The petitioners contended that the imported equipment fell under the category of highly specialised devices, exempt from compulsory registration under the Electronic and IT Goods (Requirements of Compulsory Registration) Orders of 2012 and 2021. It was submitted that the seizure was contrary to the policy and that no such license was required for the imports in question. On the other hand, the senior standing counsel for the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), Dominic Fernandes, defended the seizure, stating that the goods had been imported without authorisation and could potentially fall within the category of restricted items or even electronic waste. He emphasised the need for scrutiny to determine whether the goods qualified as highly specialised equipment, as claimed. Acknowledging the complexities involved, the panel directed the customs to process the petitioners’ application for provisional release, subject to key conditions. The petitioners must deposit the enhanced duty amount, as quantified by customs, following which the goods shall be released. The panel mandated a bank guarantee equivalent to 10 per cent of the total value of the goods. Additionally, the panel allowed the petitioners to seek a waiver of demurrage charges by submitting a separate application, which must be objectively considered by the authorities. The petitioners were required to maintain detailed records of sales and transactions if the goods were sold post-release. It was made clear that the interim relief did not bar the customs department from continuing its investigation and adjudication under applicable laws.
2. HC tells police to act on rally plea
Justice J. Sreenivas Rao of the Telangana High Court, sitting in the vacation court, directed the Warangal police to consider applications filed by the Telangana Rythu Sangham seeking permission for a farmers rally and public meeting (Raithu Bahiranga Sabha) scheduled between May 26 and 28. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by the farmers’ body and its leader, Morthala Chander Rao, alleging inaction by the police in granting the necessary permissions for their rally and meeting. According to the petitioners, the proposed rally is expected to involve around 800 farmers, starting from Karmika Maidanam (opposite Ratna Hotel) to Sai Convention Hall, Sivanagar, Warangal, on May 27 from 10 am to 1 pm, followed by a public meeting at Azam Jahi Mill Grounds from 5 pm to 10 pm. Multiple representations and a formal online application were submitted, but no decision was taken by the authorities. While the government pleader argued that a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the district collector was necessary for further action, the judge observed that the matter warranted expeditious disposal. The judge accordingly directed the petitioners to submit the required NOC from the collector. Upon submission, the police authorities were instructed to consider all pending representations and the online application dated May 17 and to pass appropriate orders following the law.
3. Disconnection without notice unfair: HC
Justice P. Sam Koshy of the Telangana High Court, sitting in vacation court, directed that the electricity supply to a swimming pool facility in Madhapur be restored if already disconnected since the occupant was not put to any prior notice. The judge passed the interim order while hearing a writ petition filed by Kallu Ramesh Reddy and A. Harshavardhan Reddy, who challenged the disconnection of power supply on May 16, by TSSPDCL officials, allegedly at the behest of a private individual claiming ownership. The petitioners contended that they had been in continuous occupation of the premises since 2014 as lessees and had established a swimming pool on the site. They argued that the disconnection was effected without any notice or hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice. Although their lease was terminated in 2021, they claimed continued possession of the premises. The standing counsel for TSSPDCL submitted that the issue appeared to be a case of dismantling, not mere disconnection. However, the petitioner’s counsel stated that the electricity meters were still intact and only the supply had been cut. Taking note of the submissions, the judge as an interim measure directed that if the meters were still intact, power supply shall be restored subject to payment of dues. If the meters had been dismantled, the status quo as on date shall be maintained. The matter is posted for further hearing after the summer vacation.
4. HC halts HYDRAA’s work on private land
Justice Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court passed an interim order restraining the HYDRAA from carrying out digging or excavation activities on private land in Kukatpally, Medchal-Malkajgiri district, without following due process of law. The order came in response to a writ petition filed by Narsing Rao and 16 others, who alleged that HYDRAA was excavating soil and gravel from their patta land, spread across various survey numbers and totalling approximately 10 acres and 38 guntas, to deepen the Nalla Cheruvu tank and raise the bund for beautification and water storage. The petitioners contended that the action of the respondents was arbitrary, illegal and in violation of the Constitution, as no prior notice, compensation or legal procedure had been followed before initiating excavation work on their privately owned land. HYDRAA, through its standing counsel, submitted that notice dated April 11, 2025, had been issued to the petitioners and others, citing alleged encroachments within the full tank level (FTL) limits of Nalla Cheruvu. The authority stated that landowners were asked to submit relevant documents for verification and that several similarly situated individuals had voluntarily offered their land in exchange for compensation or transferable development rights (TDRs). After hearing both sides, the High Court issued an interim direction prohibiting HYDRAA from interfering with the petitioners’ possession or undertaking any further excavation on the subject land until the enquiry pursuant to the notice is concluded and due legal process is followed.
