By L. Ravichander

Copyright deccanchronicle

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court on Thursday disposed of a writ petition filed by a legal practitioner on the taxation side challenging the seizure by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) of 34.65 kg of silver and ₹5 lakh cash from their residence. The panel comprising Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Suddala Chalapathi Rao was dealing with a plea filed by Tejprakash Toshniwal and others. The petitioners contended that the silver bricks and cash represented professional earnings and legitimate acquisitions. It was alleged that while the ED intended to search the premises of the son of the petitioner, the authorities searched the entire joint family property without notice, warrant, or authorisation. Per contra, the ED argued that proceedings under Section 17(4) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, had commenced on July 18, and that the petitioners could establish ownership of the seized assets before the adjudicating authority under Section 8(2) of the Act. The ED stated that the seized articles would remain frozen and not be disposed of until a decision was made. The panel recording these submissions directed the petitioners to approach the adjudicating authority within seven days with relevant documents to substantiate their claim. It directed the authority to adhere strictly to the statutory timelines and to consider providing a virtual hearing if sought.Plea against Goshamahal road-widening workJustice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court took file a writ plea challenging the road-widening works being undertaken by the GHMC and other authorities near Goshamahal, Hyderabad. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Shobha Devi Goenka and several other residents of Goshamahal. The petitioners contended that the proposed widening from 80 feet to 100 feet, in deviation from the master plan, would result in the acquisition of their small commercial properties (mulgies) on the Darussalam-Malakunta stretch. The petitioners contended that such action of deviation was arbitrary and contrary to the notified master plan, which earmarked only 80 feet for the road. The petitioners questioned the powers of the authorities in extending beyond the approved plan and claimed that their livelihood would be affected. The judge acknowledged the grievance of the petitioners that the land could not be acquired arbitrarily or outside the framework of the law and clarified that the respondents cannot acquire the land except strictly in accordance with the master plan and applicable legal procedure. The judge also observed that the mere deviation from the master plan did not, by itself, amount to being against thepublic interest or public purpose. The judge disposed of the writ plea directing GHMC and HMDA to proceed with the project in compliance with the master plan. The judge emphasised that while infrastructure projects serve the public interest, individual rights must also be safeguarded through due process of law. Oustee of Srisailam dam moves HC Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea alleging denial of employment under the displaced persons quota in connection with the Srisailam project. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by P. Shameena, who complained that despite her losing land and house to submergence under the project, her representation for appointment to posts such as junior assistant, office subordinate, or lascar was not considered. It was the case of the petitioner that as per several government orders, 50 per cent of vacancies were required to be earmarked for displaced persons. The petitioner contended that though she was included in the eligible list, the authorities failed to act and instead proceeded to fill posts under a government order of October 2024. She argued that such action was illegal, arbitrary, violative of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation Act, 2013, besides infringing her rights under the Constitution. Agri ex-officials lose plea for arrears Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ plea filed by a group of retired agricultural extension officers (AES) seeking arrears of salary and benefits. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Ch Bhadraiah and eight others who claimed entitlement to promotion as AES (Grade-I) with retrospective effect from April 1997, arguing that administrative lapses denied them their lawful dues. The petitioners argued that despite orders passed by the AP Administrative Tribunal and specific directives from the commissioner of horticulture, the joint director of agriculture, Khammam, had failed to pay the arrears. They contended that their promotion and consequent salary adjustments were delayed due to administrative lapses, and they were entitled to arrears amounting to over Rs1 lakh each. The district agricultural officer argued that the petitioners were granted notional…