TS High Court panel directs govt to clarify as to how insecticide was being used to ripen fruits

The panel directed experts to be present to assist the panel on the issue whether the chemicals classified as insecticides can be used for ripening of food.

By   |  Published: 17th Sep 2020  10:05 pm

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court, comprising Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B Vijaysen Reddy on Thursday directed the State to place a report on the use of Ethephon Ethlene Ripen sachets for ripening of fruits. The panel was dealing with a writ plea filed by M/s Goldripe International Private Limited. The petitioner questioned the action of the Home department in interfering with its business activities by not allowing the use of Ethephon Ethlene Ripen sachets for ripening of fruits in spite of approval from the FSSAI and Customs clearance. The panel required the government to clarify as to how insecticide was being used to ripen fruits and whether the company was following all the guidelines of FSSAI while using them so as not to harm health of people at large.

The panel directed experts to be present to assist the panel on the issue whether the chemicals classified as insecticides can be used for ripening of food. The panel further directed the Assistant Solicitor General to ensure that expert from Food Safety and Standards were present in the court. The panel will continue to hear the matter on September 28.

HC orders Revenue authorities to verify, submit a report

The same panel directed the Revenue authorities to verify and submit a report whether any lands in the buffer zone and prohibited area was being encroached upon in the land situated between Golconda Fort and Qutub Shahi Tombs. The panel was dealing with a writ petition filed in public interest by Omim Maneckshaw Debara. The petitioner questioned the No Objection granted to M/s Aditya Homes Private Limited by Archeological Survey Of India for constructions of Villas in Sy No 250 251, 252, 253 and 255 in T S No 19 Quilia Mohammed Nagar Shaikpet Golconda Mandal Hyderabad as illegal arbitrary contrary to the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, The petitioner contented that the no objection was also contrary to a judgement of the Supreme Court. The panel adjourned the matter by a week.

Adjourns the case by two weeks

The same panel ordered notices to District Collector, Jagitial and Superintendent Engineer irrigation and CAD Jagtial. The panel was dealing with a public interest litigation filed by Bodugam Mohan Reddy. The petitioner challenged the inaction of the State in not taking any action against encroachments made in the Madiga Kunta Tank of Raikal Village and Mandal Jagityal District. Naresh Reddy Chinolla, counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are several encroachments in the lake and the officials were turning a blind eye to the encroachments. The panel adjourned the matter by two weeks granting time to the authorities to respond.

‘Appellate board will be constituted?’

The same panel questioned the State Advocate General BS Prasad as to why Pollution Control Board was not being constituted by the government. The panel further questioned as to when the appellate board would be constituted. The panel was dealing with a PIL field by Front line Environment Safeguard Society. The counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the Pollution Control Board Appellate Authority was not constituted and was vacant since long time. The panel adjourned the matter by two weeks granting time to the AG to file the report.

Notice to SCR

The same panel ordered notice to South Central Railway in a matter pertaining to construction of a permanent drainage system. The panel was dealing with a PIL filed by Meera Rambabu. They sought construction of either a permanent solution to the water logging at Rail Underpass No 55 situated at Thippalammagudem village near Thipparthi, Nalgonda district.The petitioner complained that because of water logging, people belonging to about 10 villages were not able to use the road.

HC refuses to grant interim order in new LRS Scheme

The same panel was not inclined to grant any interim order in the new LRS Scheme.  It however directed the government to respond to the question of the validity of the Telangana Regularisation of Unapproved and illegal Layout Rules 2020. The panel was dealing with a petition filed by Forum for Good Governance. It questioned the government’s notification calling for regularisation of unapproved and illegal layouts for both rural and urban areas. The petitioner pointed out that the said action was contrary to various State and GHMC Acts. Senior advocate S. Satyam Reddy, appearing for the petitioner complained that the action of the government left no area where regularization was not permitted. The panel granting time to the government to respond, adjourned the matter to October 8.

HC directs Registry to club a petition questioning directions to all clinical firms

The same panel directed the Registry to club a petition questioning directions to all clinical organisations established under the Clinical Establishments Act 2010 in the State to attach the Cycle Threshold Value (T value) with other Covid-related matters. The panel was dealing with a PIL filed by Sri Ram Prasad Teegala. He questioned attachment of the T value to Reverse Transcription Potymerase Chain Reaction RTPCR test results of Covid patients. To the uninitiated, the T value would help in triaging of Covid patients in moving them quickly to hospitals with appropriate bed and medical equipment facility as per their viral load and case severity. The panel will now continue to hear the petition with similar Covid matters.

‘PIL was frivolous’

The same panel dismissed a PIL questioning the hoisting of the National Flag inside a room by officials of the Yadgirigutta Temple. The panel was dealing with a PIL filed by Narsingoju Naresh Kumar. D Ramakrishna, counsel for the petitioner, complained that the action of Geeta Reddy, Executive Officer Yadgirigutta Temple, Yadadri District in hoisting the National Flag inside a room and not outside. He complained that the action was contrary to National Honour Act 1971 and Flag Code of India 2002. The panel observed that the PIL was frivolous and dismissed the same.

 


Now you can get handpicked stories from Telangana Today on Telegram everyday. Click the link to subscribe.

Click to follow Telangana Today Facebook page and Twitter .