Telangana HC hears writ appeals of Assembly Secretary challenging order on disqualification petitions
the High Court on Tuesday heard three writ appeals filed by the Secretary of the Telangana State Legislative Assembly, challenging the order of the Single Judge who had directed the Assembly Secretary to place disqualification petitions before the Assembly Speaker for fixing a schedule to hear them
By Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: A Division Bench of the Telangana High Court, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao, on Tuesday heard three writ appeals filed by the Secretary of the Telangana State Legislative Assembly, challenging the order of the Single Judge who had directed the Assembly Secretary to place disqualification petitions before the Assembly Speaker for fixing a schedule to hear them.
The appeals were presented before the court by the Advocate General of Telangana, A. Sudershan Reddy, representing the Assembly Secretary. The Advocate General argued that the Single Judge had erred in issuing such a direction to the Secretary, as it amounted to interfering with the Speaker’s discretionary powers at a pre-decisional stage. He contended that under the rules of the Telangana Legislative Assembly, disqualification petitions, once filed, were to be reviewed by the Speaker within a three-month period. The petitioners, he said, had approached the High Court within just 10 days of filing the petitions, which was premature and in violation of the prescribed process. The AG further pointed out that the issue of disqualification falls within the domain of the Speaker, and the Court cannot direct the Speaker to take action on disqualification petitions at this stage. He cited a judgment of the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, which had clearly stated that courts cannot intervene in the Speaker’s decision-making process regarding disqualification petitions.
In support of the argument, Senior Counsel Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, representing one of the petitioners, Danam Nagender, also aligned with the Advocate General’s stance. Inconclusively hearing the matter, the bench posted the matter to Wednesday for further hearing.
2. Justice B Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed the Mokila police to permit Vijay Madduri’s counsel to accompany him to the police station during the investigation. Vijay Madduri, who was implicated in the alleged drug case had moved a lunch motion before the court citing urgency in the matter. The petitioner stated that the police were acting in an unlawful and illegitimate manner infringing his fundamental rights. He said that he was citizen of the USA and holds an American passport. Stating that he was a software entrepreneur with 30 years of experience, he said he had a Diwali party at Raj Pakala’s house after returning from a business tour to Netherlands. He argued that he had not consumed any prohibited substances in India and raised concerns over the high-handed action of the police. He informed the court that he received a notice on November 4 to appear before police within two days. Directing the police to act in accordance with law, the judge directed that petitioner can be accompanied by his counsel to the police station.
