Live
- Sunny Leone's Name Used in Fraud Under Chhattisgarh’s Mahtari Vandan Yojana
- Gold Business Fraud Uncovered in Atmakur, Wanaparthy
- Rachakonda Police Seize Rs.88 Crore Worth Drugs, Arrest 521 Accused
- Sriram Krishnan Appointed Senior Policy Advisor for AI at the White House
- Cyclone alert at seven ports in Tamil Nadu; rain, strong winds expected
- Uttarakhand CM to attend MP govt's 'Jan Kalyan Parv' in Sagar today
- Sri Jagdamba Pearls Expands Presence with the launch of its Second Store in Bengaluru at Lulu Mall
- Congress remembers Dalits only in bad times: Mayawati taunts Rahul Gandhi on Parbhani visit
- Have time for jailed leaders but none for achievers: BJP slams Delhi govt over chess champion’s pain
- Alliance University holds 13th Convocation, 1145 students receive degrees
PIL challenges preliminary land acquisition for Sitarama project
Telangana High Court
On Monday, The Telangana High Court division bench, headed by the Chief ustice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surepalli Nanda, on Monday 'closed' the public interest litigation filed by Sondi Veeriah of Bhadradri-Kothagudem challenging the preliminary land acquisition notification dated August 24, 2018, for Sri Sitarama Lift Irrigation Project at Palwancha.
Hyderabad: On Monday, The Telangana High Court division bench, headed by the Chief ustice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surepalli Nanda, on Monday 'closed' the public interest litigation filed by Sondi Veeriah of Bhadradri-Kothagudem challenging the preliminary land acquisition notification dated August 24, 2018, for Sri Sitarama Lift Irrigation Project at Palwancha.
The court took note of the contention put forth by Radhiv, Special GP, that the district collector /land acquisition officer, Bhadradri-Kothagudem has passed the award of making payment of compensation to all the 30 non-tribals whose lands were acquired for constructing the irrigation project. They have been paid compensation @ Rs 6 lakh per person.
The bench, while closing the PIL said it was filed in 2019 and since then the court has not passed any orders on the PIL. On Monday, the State government informed that all the 30 non-tribals (SCs) whose lands had been acquired have been paid compensation @ Rs 6 lakh per person. Hence, the bench closed the PIL.
Ramana, counsel for the petitioner, informed the court that the land acquisition officer cannot issue such notification as it is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court and the State cannot provide any compensation or any benefit to the land-losers under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013. The court was not inclined to take such submissions into consideration as the compensation was already paid to those whose lands were acquired.
HC summons principal secretary for education & 2 other officials
The HC division bench on Monday heard the writ petition filed by Oxford Convent Educational Society and three others seeking direction to the State government that the recognition rules in so far as it defines the term school to include pre-primary schools or section of a school within the meaning of the term educational institution, as defined under Section 218 of AP Education Act 1982 as adopted by the State in GO 1 dated January 1, 1994.
Further, the impugned memo no 5844/SE Gen/A2/2016 dated October 22, 2016, issued by the government proposing to charge Rs 1 lakh (Rs 100,000) per school towards application fee for grant of recognition for pre-primary schools under the Act is arbitrary and illegal
The CJ irked over the government not filing the counter-affidavit, reminded the government pleader that earlier the court had directed the respondent to file a counter-affidavit within six weeks, and also one last opportunity is granted to file the affidavit failing which the court shall be ordering personal appearance of the concerned government officials.
The CJ bench directed the Principal Secretary, State Education department, The Commissioner and Director of School Education, and the DEO, RR district, to be present before the court on August 17 and file the counter affidavit. Hearing in the case was adjourned to August 17.
