HYDERABAD: B Srinivasa Gandhi, superintendent of Central Tax (Technical) in Nizamabad division of Medchal commissionerate, approached the Telangana High Court challenging the CBI probe against him in an alleged GST fraud case. He challenged the Central government for according permission to the CBI to conduct the probe against him. It is alleged that the deputy commissioner of anti-tax evasion and Srinivasa Gandhi demanded Rs 5 crore in connection with an investigation against Infiniti Metal Products India Limited and other companies in the group for wrongful availment of input tax credit worth Rs 246.86 crore.Gandhi, in his petition, urged the court to stay all proceedings, including the probe, in the FIR registered by the CBI on September 11 this year under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He stated that Infiniti director Sridhar Reddy had made false allegations against him before the CBI. While working as assistant director in Enforcement Directorate office, Hyderabad, Gandhi had pointed out certain omissions and commissions by the CBI in cases against AP Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy and 73 others. Because of this, an FIR had been registered against him and his wife in September last year with malafide motives and false allegations of disproportionate assets, Gandhi added.
Petitioner warned for filing two PILs on same matter
Finding fault with a petitioner for filing a second PIL on the same matter, a division bench of the Telangana High Court, on Thursday, warned him of a penalty of Rs 1 lakh for abusing the justice system.
The petitioner advocate Ch Naresh Reddy, in his PIL, had complained that the authorities of Nirmal district had failed to take action against alleged illegal constructions in Nirmal (Urban) mandal on lands earmarked for parks, picnics and playgrounds. “Stop joking with the court, otherwise, we will impose exemplary costs of Rs 1 lakh on you. The present PIL is an abuse of the process of the court,” the bench remarked. The bench comprising Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B Vijaysen Reddy is dealing with the PIL. After hearing the case, the bench asked advocate A Divya — who appeared for the petitioner — why the present PIL was filed when the same issue was the subject matter of another PIL, wherein Naresh Reddy was appearing as counsel. After warning the counsel, the bench directed Naresh Reddy to appear before the court on the next date of case hearing, namely December 8.
HC directs discom to fill junior lineman vacancies
In a relief to unemployed youth aspiring for junior lineman posts, the Telangana High Court directed the State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (TSSPDCL) to appoint the petitioners, who have secured relevant merit and found to be suitable to the unfilled vacancies in pursuant to the notification issued in 2006. The court also directed the company to complete this exercise within three months. Justice P Naveen Rao passed this order recently in petitions filed by several aspirants, challenging the recruitment notification issued last year to fill about 2,500 junior lineman posts. Petitioners’ counsel Chikkudu Prabhakar submitted that his clients are fully qualified and eligible for appointment, and participated in the selections. The authorities, however, issued a fresh notification last year which is ex-facie illegal, he argued.Senior counsel G Vidyasagar, appearing for TSSPDCL, told the court that there were no vacancies available pursuant to recruitment notification of 2006. In fact, around 2,443 excess vacancies were filled up. Therefore, there is no merit in the petitioners’ contention in the case, he added.Justice Naveen Rao found that the Discom had earlier stated that if persons applied for selections held pursuant to 2006 notification were not appointed due to condition in clause 6 (iv)(c) of the revised notification of 2006, they would be considered for appointment.
Recent Random Post:
