Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court overturned the compulsory retirement of a judicial officer at the age of 50, declaring the decision arbitrary and lacking proper justification. A two-judge panel comprising Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice N. Narsing Rao ruled that the removal from service of the judicial officer was not supported by substantial evidence and violated the fundamental principles of fairness. The panel was dealing with a writ petition filed by Mohd. Yousuf, a judicial officer with over two decades of service, who was forcibly retired in April 2018. The decision was purportedly taken in the public interest, on recommendations from the High Court’s administrative committee which had concluded that he was “not of continued utility.” Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner held various judicial positions, including II Metropolitan Magistrate at LB Nagar and Judicial First Class Magistrate at Zaheerabad, and consistently received positive performance reviews. His annual confidential reports contained remarks such as “Good” and “Very Good,” with no adverse findings. The only negative entry — a 2016 remark vaguely suggesting doubts about his integrity without any supporting evidence — was deemed by the court as insufficient grounds for termination. The government pleader defended the retirement decision, contending that the judiciary demanded the highest ethical standards and that the administrative committee ahd acted within its authority. However, the panel found that the due process of law was not followed. The petitioner was neither given an opportunity to present his case nor provided with substantial evidence justifying his removal. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the panel emphasised that an officer’s entire service record must be taken into account before imposing such a drastic measure and that unverified allegations cannot serve as the sole basis for compulsory retirement. Consequently, the panel ordered petitioner’s immediate reinstatement with full service benefits and while his career progression will be maintained through notional pay fixation, he will not be entitled to back wages for the period he was out of service.
Accused with narcotics granted bail
Justice K. Sujana of Telangana High Court granted regular bail to a driver alleged to be in possession of one kilogram of hashish oil. The judge was dealing with a regular bail petition filed by Kunchala Srinu, who was in custody since October 22, 2024, in connection with crime registered with the Kukatpally police. According to the prosecution, the Kukatpally sub-inspector received credible information about three individuals allegedly possessing hashish oil and planning to board a bus near the Moosapet Metro Rail station towards Maharashtra. Following a search operation, the police seized one kilogram of hashish oil and arrested the accused, including the petitioner and registered a case the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner was falsely implicated and that the search and seizure were vitiated by procedural improprieties. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents and was in custody for over three months, despite the completion of the investigation. The additional public prosecutor opposed the bail petition on the ground that serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner. The judge observed that, as per the NDPS Act, “commercial quantity” is defined as any quantity greater than the amount specified by the Centre. In the present case, the judge observed that seized contraband was exactly one kilogram, which does not fall under “commercial quantity.” Thus, considering the fact that the quantity seized was not a commercial quantity and the period of incarceration in jail undergone by the petitioner, the judge deemed it fit to grant conditional bail to the petitioner.
Govt cannot reinstate teacher in private school : HC
Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of Telangana High Court ruled that the government lacked the authority to compel a private institution to reinstate a teacher. The judge was hearing a writ petition filed by Prince English Medium High School challenging the proceedings issued by the state’s school education department and the district educational officer, Nirmal. These orders directed the school to reinstate G. Kishan who was the former physical education teacher, for 11 months. The petitioner argued that the orders were issued merely to avoid contempt proceedings and lacked merit. It was contended that the teacher was employed on a contract basis for two academic years, with his contract ending on April 30, 2019. He did not express willingness to continue for the next academic year, leading the school to inform him that his services would not be renewed. However, the teacher later claimed that his discontinuation violated the AP Education Act. The teacher alleged that he was coerced into signing resignation letters and that the school administration acted arbitrarily. He contended that the school’s management forced teachers to sign agreements preventing them from seeking legal recourse and that his termination was unlawful, as it was carried out without an inquiry or approval from the competent authority. In response, the state authorities maintained that the reinstatement orders were issued in accordance with legal directives. It was noted that the teacher submitted an appeal, which led to an investigation revealing arbitrary actions by the school. After hearing the submissions, the judge concluded that the teacher was appointed on a temporary contract and had not signed an agreement for the 2019-2020 academic year. The judge also noted that the teacher took employment elsewhere, reinforcing the fact that he could not claim reinstatement. As a result, the judge allowed the writ petition, setting aside the reinstatement orders.
