The Telangana High Court on Tuesday sought the response of the State government on the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions relating to conduct of elections to Urban Local Bodies (ULB). A division bench comprising Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Shameem Akther directed the Additional Advocate General J Ramchander Rao to file the State government’s reply by Friday.
The bench instructed the HC Registry to tag all the related petitions and post them for hearing on August 13. The main contention of the petitioners was that delimitation of wards, publication of ward-wise photo electoral rolls and the schedule for identification of voters from scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, backward classes and women, was done hastily by the State government. The entire process was carried out violating the rules of Telangana Municipalities Act, they contended.
The previous day, the standing counsel for the State Election Commission (SEC) Vidya Sagar told the bench that no objections were raised in 69 municipalities and hence conducting elections to these bodies may be permitted. The bench observed that it cannot allow the SEC to go ahead with polls in 69 municipalities since the petitioners challenged the entire pre-poll process in all the municipalities.
The bench said the pre-poll process should be in compliance with the time schedule given by the single judge while adjudicating petitions relating to ULB polls.
Writ petition dismissed
Justice G. Sri Devi of Telangana High Court on Tuesday has dismissed as withdrawn the writ petition filed by Koneru Krishna, brother of TRS Sirpur MLA Koneru Konappa, who was arrested in a case of assault on forest officials in Kumram Asifabad district.
Mr Krishna, along with some others, was arrested by the police on charge of assaulting a woman forest officer and lodged in prison. He moved the bail petition in the High Court. The petitioners counsel Vijay Sen Reddy told the court that the police have revoked 7 Indian Penal Code sections along with provisions of the Prevention of Atrocities against Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act against the petitioner.
He contended that the petitioner did not know the names and castes of the forest officials who accused the petitioner of attacking them. He said Mr Krishna was implicated in a false case. The Public Prosecutor C Pratap Reddy said the investigation was yet to be completed and some more witnesses were to be examined by the police. He told the court that there was adequate evidence against Mr Krishna and his aides to prove that they obstructed the officials from discharging their duties.
