Children’s custody bank in the High Court of Telangana

Hyderabad: Two judges’ vacation teams in the Telangana High Court accepted a writ of habeas proof to custody a minor boy, currently under the care of the child welfare committee Ranga Reddy District. The group heard a petition filed by a couple who claimed that the child was under the illegal custody of the defendant authorities and should be returned to them or to his biological mother. The petitioner said that the third petitioner was the biological mother of the child and that the current custody arrangement was not supported by any legal adoption. The petitioner believes that neither the respondent nor any other person has legal requirements for minors. Some believe that custody must lie to the biological or adoptive parents. The incident comes in the context of a recent investigation into police officers suspected of trafficking in children’s rackets. Government pleaders who appeared in the government argued that the child involved had earlier claimed to be the son of a woman he identified with his name, but police inquiry was still ongoing to determine the biological origins. The boy was registered on June 10 and the boy was safely detained by authorities. Taking into account the submission, the judge refused to pass any temporary guidance to transfer custody and post the matter after the summer vacation for further hearing.
HC keeps demolishing so-called illegal buildings
Justice J. Sreenivas Rao of the High Court of Telangana sat in the holiday court and suspended the demolition lawsuit initiated by GHMC against private entities, which allegedly unauthorized construction, observed that the lawsuit was taken without following proper legal proceedings. The judge admitted a written petition filed by Sree Kailas Industrial Gas Co., Ltd., which attempted to declare the authorities’ remarks to be illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. The petitioner argues that the order was ordered by failing to comply with mandatory legal proceedings without considering its previous statements. It was believed that the demolition order violated the latest Supreme Court decision on demolition of an unauthorized structure, which provided for strict procedural guarantees. The petitioner believes that the actions of GHMC violated its fundamental rights, especially constitutional property rights, and violated the principles of natural justice. While suspending the demolition lawsuit, the judge directed the petitioner not to further build the property before ordering further orders. The matter was issued eight weeks later and further ruling was provided to respondents.
The effectiveness of HC acceptance of SC subclassification
Two judges’ holiday groups at the Telangana High Court accepted two writ requests, challenging the Telangana program’s caste (Reservation Rationalization) Act, as well as the 2025 Constitution, and relevant government orders issued to give it a role. The group composed of Justice Pulla Karthik and Justice Rao Nandikonda heard the writs filed by Mala Mahanadu, the scheduled caste Ikya Vedika and others. The petitioner challenged the legality of Bill 15 of 2025, citing that it classified the program caste and allocated a certain percentage of retention without collecting empirical data on lagging or underrepresented by certain groups. It was argued that the subcategory was based solely on reports submitted by a single-person committee appointed under the 11 October 2024 government order, which itself lacked support data. The petitioner argued that the legislation and the GO, which followed, dated April 14, 2025, involved notifications, rules frameworks and designations on the roster, were inconsistent with the Constitution. The defense relies on various Supreme Court decisions that prohibit such subcategories of pre-determined castes without specific data. The petitioner demanded that the Ordered Act and the GO be declared arbitrary, illegal and superconstitutional constitution and put aside the report of the single-person committee. The panel directed the state to respond in a written debate and post the matter after the summer vacation.