Hyderabad: Justice K. Sarath of the Telangana High Court on Saturday restrained revenue authorities from interfering with properties situated at Hakimpet village, Shaikpet mandal, Hyderabad, citing earlier court orders and ongoing disputes over boundary demarcation. The judge passed the interim order in a house motion challenging the actions of the respondent authorities in attempting to fence the subject property despite subsisting interim directions. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the officials were trying to erect fencing around the petitioners’ land measuring approximately 28 acres and 27 guntas, starting from April 17. It was contended that such actions violated earlier interim orders passed by the High Court on April 2, 2009, and amounted to unlawful interference with the petitioner’s possession. On the other hand, the government pleader, based on oral instructions, submitted that the fencing activity pertains to government land measuring 12 acres located in Survey No. 102/1 of the same village and not the land held by the petitioners. He requested time to file a detailed counter in the matter. The judge after taking note of the submissions from both sides, observed that there was no material to show that the authorities were currently interfering with the petitioners’ land. However, to prevent any potential breach of possession, the judge directed the respondent authorities not to interfere with the petitioners’ possession in Survey Nos. 102/2 and 102/3 until further orders.
HC dismisses doc’s plea against transfer order
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ plea filed by a senior professor challenging her transfer from Niloufer Hospital, Hyderabad, to MGM Hospital, Warangal, as part of general transfers last year. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Dr A. Vijayalakshmi, Professor of paediatrics, seeking to set aside her transfer order issued pursuant to a counselling session conducted in July 2024. The petitioner assailed the transfer process as arbitrary and in violation of a government order issued on July 3, 2024, which governed the conditions and procedure for transfer of employees in the medical and health services. The petitioner contended that she was not included in the compulsory transfer list on the official portal and did not exercise any preference. She argued that the circulars issued in July 2024, summoning the cadre for counselling at the eleventh hour, were illegal, deprived her of a fair opportunity, and aimed at selectively exempting certain individuals. The petitioner contended that exemptions under the GO were granted without proper verification and that her claim under medical and spouse grounds was not considered. The medical department and other authorities contended that the petitioner had completed more than six years of service in her present station and was included in the long-standing list based on station seniority. It was also pointed out that the petitioner attended the counselling session and opted for posting at MGM Hospital, Warangal, which was accordingly allotted to her. The judge noted that the petitioner participated in the counselling and chose the place of posting voluntarily. The judge also observed that the exemptions granted to three professors, including the unofficial respondent Dr R. Vinod Kumar, were as per government instructions applicable to recognised office-bearers of employee associations. Relying on Supreme Court judgments that limit judicial interference in matters of transfer unless mala fides were established, the judge held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any mala fide intention or statutory violation in the transfer order and dismissed the writ plea.
HC to examine tender on milk
Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court extended interim relief in a writ plea challenging the cancellation and re-tendering of transportation contracts for the supply of milk to anganwadi centres. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Ushodaya Transport Solutions, challenging the actions of the Telangana Dairy Development Cooperative Federation Ltd, in cancelling tenders floated on October 11, 2024, for the transportation of milk to Mancherial, Nirmal, and Yadadri Bhuvanagiri districts. These tenders were part of a larger contract covering 35,700 anganwadi centres statewide. The petitioner contended that the cancellation was done without assigning reasons, and was followed by the issuance of a fresh tender notification on January 18 for 24 districts while excluding the previously tendered ones. The petitioner sought a declaration against the cancellation of the original tenders and issuance of the new tenders as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner urged the court to direct the respondents to award the contract in its favour for the originally tendered three districts, based on the valid bids submitted. The judge upon hearing initial arguments, noted that the petitioner had quoted a lower rate (Rs 4.15 per unit) compared to Rs 4.17 quoted in other finalised districts, and that the tenders for Mancherial, Nirmal, and Yadadri Bhuvanagiri were cancelled allegedly due to the lower quote. In view of the above, the court had earlier passed an interim order restraining the respondents from finalising the tenders issued under the notification dated January 18 until further hearing. The court further extended the interim relief and posted the matter for further adjudication, pending a detailed examination of the legality of the cancellation and re-tendering process.
Firm challenges SD Eye Hosp tender
Justice E.V. Venugopal of the Telangana High Court will continue to hear a writ petition challenging the award of contract for an Integrated Hospital Facility Management Services at Sarojini Devi Eye Hospital, Mehdipatnam, by the Hyderabad district collector and the hospital superintendent. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by SS Consultancy. The petitioner alleged serious irregularities and violation of tender norms in awarding the contract to an ineligible bidder. The petitioner challenged the proceedings issued by the collector on June 21, 2023, and the consequential order by the hospital superintendent on June 21, 2023. These proceedings resulted in awarding the e-tender contract work for providing hospital facility management services to an ineligible bidder, despite alleged non-compliance with the mandatory technical bid qualifications. The petitioner submitted that the ineligible bidder failed to submit valid documents and did not meet the required eligibility criteria as per e-tender document. The petitioner would allege that despite this, the authorities ignored the valid and technically eligible bid submitted by the petitioner and proceeded to issue orders permitting the unofficial respondent to take over the hospital premises. The petitioner prayed for setting aside the impugned proceedings and for a direction to the authorities to consider and award the tender to the petitioner firm. The judge posted the matter for further adjudication.
