Can’t perform duties of EC, says bench

The two-judge bench refused to interfere with the Telangana government’s decision to conduct early elections stating there was no violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.

By Author  |  Legal Correspondent  |  Published: 12th Sep 2018  11:56 pm
High Court of Hyderabad

Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad, comprising Chief Justice TBN Radhakrishnan and Justice SV Bhatt, on Wednesday stated that it would be appropriate to abstain from interfering with the decision of Telangana government to conduct early elections as there was no violation of constitutional or statutory provisions in calling for early elections. The bench dismissed a writ plea filed by Rapolu Bhaskar. It pointed out that the court cannot interfere in matters of governance unless there is a constitutional violation in the process of dissolution of Legislative Assembly. The petitioner submitted that early elections would be a burden on public exchequer. He complained that the government’s decision to conduct early elections before completion of five years was against the will and wish of the people. He sought directions to the Election Commission not to conduct elections. The bench stated that courts cannot perform the duties of the Election Commission as the Election Commission of India has a constitutional role to take a decision on conducting elections in a State.

File details on lake restoration, officials told

The same bench sought the response of the Telangana government with regard to rejuvenation and restoration of lakes and water bodies in the twin cities. The bench was dealing with a writ plea filed by Anjana Sinha who questioned the concretising the Malkam Cheruvu at Raidurg Serlingampally. The bench directed the officials to file an affidavit on actions taken by them and adjourned the matter to September 27.

Court unhappy over delayed response

The same bench voiced its displeasure over non-submission of records by the government pleader for Revenue even after two years from the date of ordering it. The petitioners had filed a writ plea earlier challenging the order passed by the Tahsildar against them in a property dispute. The impugned order was challenged in this appeal. The bench was not satisfied with the response of the government pleader that they were unable to trace the record due to reorganisation. It directed that either the report be submitted or the Tahsildar of Garidepally appear in person to explain the reasons. The matter was adjourned to next Thursday.

Case on online rummy adjourned

A two-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice TBN Radhakrishnan and Justice V Ramasubramanian, on Wednesday heard inconclusively the matter pertaining to the legality of online rummy. The bench was dealing with a batch of writ pleas filed by online rummy organisers like Junglee Games Private Limited, Play Games 24*7 Private Limited and other companies from Mumbai, Delhi and Hyderabad. The petitioners challenged the ordinance on bringing ‘online rummy’ game under the Gaming Act by amending the provisions of Telangana Gaming Act, 1974. The government had issued ordinance in June this year prohibiting online rummy. Senior Counsel Hardin Raval, appearing for the government, pointed out that online was only a mode in which the game was played and it did not change the nature of the game. He said that rummy, whether played physically in a room or virtually online, is a game of chance and not a game of skill. Earlier, the bench also heard senior counsel CV Mohan Reddy, appearing for the petitioners. He cited various apex court judgements that stated rummy was a game of skill. The bench adjourned the matter to Tuesday.