Hyderabad: Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao of the High Court of Telangana directed the police chief to consider a representative of a 54-year-old woman to seek compassionate appointments for her eldest daughter, who is currently unemployed and caring for her elderly. The order was in response to a written petition filed by Sultanna and her daughter, questioning the rejection of their request for compassionate appointment on April 17, 2023. Younus, assistant deputy inspector of the Canlanbag Police Department, died while serving on October 24, 2022. His family, including Sultana and her three children – two daughters and a son, demanded that the elderly daughter be nominated for appointing a compassionate appointment. The petitioner said that the son is an NRI living in Canada and has no relationship with the family financially or emotionally, and the youngest daughter lives independently with her husband. The eldest daughter has been staying at home, taking care of her mother and facing financial difficulties. The petitioner argued that the authorities did not consider these circumstances when they rejected the application of their grown daughter, citing procedural issues such as the lack of a certificate of financial status for the husband of the eldest daughter and compliance with government guidelines that often exclude married daughters from compassionate appointments. Respondents believed that the son was earned abroad under universal rules and government orders (including various memorandums and GOS), making other family members ineligible for such appointments. Furthermore, it was pointed out that the deceased listed only his spouse, not his children as family members in the official record. After hearing both sides, the judge relied on various precedents that, in some cases, acknowledged the compassionate appointment of married daughters. It is believed that although the petitioners did not submit complete documents, especially financial details of the eldest daughter’s husband, their case should be reconsidered. In short, the judge directed the petitioner to submit a new representative, including all relevant documents, especially the financial status of the daughter and husband.
HC insists on bidding award
Justice Euthpalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court insisted on the supply awards of chowkis, bookshelf and other in the Anganwadi Centre in 33 districts. The judge dismissed a written petition filed by Gudimalkapur Marc-M Furniture and questioned the tender for the award to Shruthikesh Industries Private Limited Kendriya Bhandar. The petitioner complained that the affidavit revealed that “not blacklisted by any government department” was not announced. This situation is not specified in the tender notice. Therefore, the reason cited by the respondent is that the reason for the cancellation of the bidding qualification is that it violates the bidding conditions. The court reiterated the legal principle: judicial review of administrative litigation is intended to prevent arbitrary, irrational, irrational, biased, and Malafides. The purpose is to check whether the choice or decision is “legal”, not to check whether the choice or decision is “reasonable”. When the power of judicial review is cited in matters relating to tender or contractual rulings, certain special functions should be kept in mind. A contract is a commercial transaction. Evaluation of tendering and awarding contracts is essentially a business function. Stay far away from the principles of fairness and natural justice. If the decisions relating to the contractual ruling are in good faith and in the public interest, the court will not exercise judicial review powers, and will not intervene even in the evaluation or evaluation of the tenderer or bias. The power of judicial review will not allow the protection of private interests at the expense of public interest or decisions on contract disputes. The judge answered in a negative challenge, citing that the decision was a challenge for Malafide or intended to favor a particular person. The negative question is also answered in the negative question. Therefore, she dismissed the writ plea.
Pleas for SCB demolition bid
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court sat on vacation and filed a writ request to question alleged attempts by the Secunderabad State Commission and the Ministry of Defense authorities to demolish the container structure and fence in Bolaram, Secunderabad Cantonment. The judge is hearing a writ request from Hazarimu Pratapmul Huf. The petitioners believe that the structure was legally established and that their families have owned the property since 1937 and are subject to property taxes on a regular basis. The petitioner will claim that authorities are now seeking to remove the structure, including the railing fence, without any notice or compliance with the appropriate procedures in the Principles of Natural Justice or the State Act. The Secunderabad State Council insists that the land in question forms part of the defense land and that any of its construction is unauthorized. After hearing both sides, the judge directed the defense officials to consider the petitioner’s submission and to pass appropriate orders within the specified time frame. The judge further directed the status quo to be maintained before such considerations were made, clarifying that interim relief was limited to that period. The matter was further heard after the summer vacation.
