Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea seeking to restrain the state government from implementing the Indiramma Indlu housing scheme in Scheduled (Fifth Schedule) Areas without incorporating the statutory safeguards mandated under tribal and agency laws. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Adivasi Sena and Madi Saibabu. The petitioners challenged the Telangana Housing Corporation Limited and other authorities in launching and proceeding with the housing scheme aimed at constructing houses on individual sites under the beneficiary-led construction model through various government orders and circulars. According to the petitioners, the decision to notify and implement the scheme in tribal-dominated Scheduled Areas without adhering to statutory safeguards, was a violation of the Telangana Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, as well as the provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, and the Rules, 2011. These laws mandate that any development programme or land-related decision in Scheduled Areas must be undertaken with the prior consent of gram sabhas and in a manner that protected tribal land rights. The petitioners argued that despite submitting multiple representations, the authorities went ahead with identifying beneficiaries and commencing implementation of the Indiramma Indlu scheme in Fifth Schedule Areas without complying with these mandatory legal requirements. Such actions, they contend, undermine constitutional protections for Scheduled Tribes and dilute the legislative intent behind protective land regulations in agency tracts. The government pleader sought time to obtain instructions.
Football coach in drug case enlarged on bail
The Telangana High Court on Monday granted bail to a football coach accused in a narcotics case involving seizure of over 800 grams of a mixture containing cocaine and ephedrine. The judge was hearing a criminal petition filed by Kodigollu Appanna. According to the prosecution, during a raid conducted in June, the police seized 820 grams of a drug mixture from two co-accused, who later claimed that the petitioner earlier requested 500 grams of ephedrine and received the substance about 20 days before the raid. No contraband, however, was recovered from the petitioner. Counsel for the petiitoner contended that the only material against the petitioner was the alleged confession of a co-accused, which has no evidentiary value. The counsel pointed out that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since August and that several co-accused were already granted bail. Noting that no substance was seized from the petitioner and that most of the investigation was complete, the judge granted conditional bail to the petitioner.
HC: Natural gas is fossil fuel
The “Tax Bench” of the Telangana High Court has held that natural gas, being primarily methane composed of carbon and hydrogen, was a readily combustible fossil fuel akin to coal and petroleum under the APGST Act, 1957. The panel of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda dismissed three revision tax cases filed by Andhra Fuels Private Limited. The revision petitioners were up against the orders of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal under different entries and requiring different incidences of tax. The petitioner was engaged the business of trading in natural gas. The petitioner purchased natural gas from the Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL), the first seller. The petitioner after purchasing natural gas from GAIL sold it to other legal entities. In the instant case, the petitioner happened to sell the natural gas that it had purchased to its sister concern RVK Energy Private Limited, which is engaged in generation of power. The petitioner had claimed the natural gas to be one which comes under the purview of industrial gas where the point of levy on tax is at the point of first sale. According to the petitioner, since it was an industrial gas under Entry 118 of 1st Schedule of the APGST Act, 1957, the levy of tax was at the first point of sale which in the instant case when the sale is made by GAIL to the petitioner. The petitioner said it could not have been subjected to levy of tax on the sale of natural gas by the petitioner. The assessing authority under the APGST Act, 1957 contended that the gas purchased by the petitioner from GAIL was classified under Entry 23 of the 6th Schedule. According to the state authorities, the sale of goods under Entry 23 of 6th Schedule was leviable on tax at every point of sale in the state. Thus, the sale of natural gas by the petitioner to other companies is also amenable to payment of tax under the APGST Act, 1957. Disagreeing with the claim, speaking for the panel, Justice P. Sam Kosy referred to various pronouncements and pointed out that there was a specific exclusion of petroleum gases prescribed in the industrial gases, as such the contention of the petitioner that it fell under entry 118 or the 1st Schedule could be taken into consideration and could not be accepted. The panel added: “A reading of Entry 23 of 6th schedule it shows that the goods which fall under the said entry are all kinds of gases whether in compressed, liquified or solidified or in any other form other than industrial gases.”
