Latest news with #ApareshKumarSingh
Hans India
6 hours ago
- Politics
- Hans India
HC directs govt to file status report on Sigachi disaster by Aug 27
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court division bench of CJ Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice P Sam Koshy on Thursday directed the government to file a comprehensive status report on the Sigachi factory disaster at Patancheru furnishing details of paying compensation to the kin of the 46 deceased workers, seriously injured and others and action taken against the management. Vasudha Nagaraj, counsel for the petitioner, informed the CJ court that 46 workers were declared dead, 28 suffered serious injuries and eight workers were declared missing in the disaster on July 1. The government has not paid the assured full and final compensation of Rs. 1 crore to each deceased family members; no action has been initiated against the management. The CJ, after hearing the counsel and the Additional A-G T Rajnikanth Reddy, enquired about the case registered against Sigachi and the stage of investigation; whether any arrests were made. The GP for Home Mahesh Raje informed no arrests were made. The CJ court, during the hearing observed that the government should not treat this PIL as an adversarial litigation, but it should put in all its endeavours to extend all facilities to the families of all deceased workers, who hail from Bihar, MP and other States. The bench heard the PIL filed by K Babu Rao, a retired scientist, seeking a direction to the government to pay full and final ex-gratia of Rs. 1 crore to each of deceased workers kin. The petitioner urged the court to instruct the government to ensure strict monitoring of industrial safety measures to prevent such tragedies. Hearing in the case was adjourned to August 27.
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Land acquired for public projects cannot be reclaimed by owners: HC
Hyderabad: Telangana high court on Thursday clarified that land once acquired for public projects cannot be claimed back by the property owners on the grounds that it has not been fully utilised for the purpose, even if the owners are willing to return the compensation. A division bench, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin, made these observations while hearing a writ appeal challenging an earlier order of the court dismissing the land owner's request to hand over the unutilised land in connection with land acquired in Datarpalli village, Gajwel of Siddipet district for the Pranahitha Chevella irrigation project. The judges said they did not find any error in the earlier high court judgement, and in the absence of any provisions in the Act as urged by the petitioner, they cannot entertain such an appeal. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad The high court had in Oct 2024 dismissed a petition filed by Andalu, whose 1.08 acre land was acquired in 2012 for the Pranahitha-Chevella project. She contended that only 18 guntas of the land was used and sought the return of the unused 30 guntas, offering to pay for it. The court held that the land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which does not contain any provision for the return of unutilised land, unlike the 2013 (Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement) Act. Since the acquisition was completed before the 2013 Act came into force, and compensation was already paid and possession taken, the petitioner could not claim the land back, the court said.
The Hindu
15 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
HC notices to government in PIL plea over Sigachi blast
Telangana High Court on Thursday issued notices to the State government and heads of different departments like Labour, Home, Industry along with the management of Sigachi Industries in a PIL petition seeking direction to constitute a Special Investigation Team to probe the blast in Sigachi Industrial unit at Banoor and pay full and final compensation to the victims' families. A bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Gouse Meera Mohiuddin directed the respondents, including Chief Secretary, Special Home Secretary, Pollution Control Board, Sangareddy Collector and Sigachi management, to file detailed counter affidavits by August 27. The PIL petition was filed by septuagenarian retired scientist Kalapala Babu Rao seeking different reliefs including release of the Report of the High Powered Committee created on June 30 to fix accountability and culpability of the company. The petitioner wanted the HC to instruct different government wings to identify the danger posed by industrial dust accumulation, absence of hazard assessment system and align India's safety protocols with global standards like NFPA 652. The petitioner's counsel Vasudha Nagaraj said the government should take responsibility for payment of one crore rupees compensation to families of all the 54 persons who died in the fire accident on Sigachi factory triggered by a blast. The victims included eight missing workers of the factory. The CJ, seeking responses of the counsels for the State, said the government should not take the PIL plea as adversarial litigation. The State should make its best efforts to assist the families of the victims, he said. Directing the respondents to file comprehensive counter affidavits responding to different points raised by the petitioner, the bench noted that passage of time should not diminish the tragedy or be allowed to be forgotten. The bench sought to know the details of the First Information Report, the different sections of law invoked in the case and the progress of the investigation. The bench also asked the Government Pleader for Home if any arrests were made in the case. The GP replied that no person was arrested so far. The bench wanted the respondents to furnish precise details like how many workers were present at the site when the fire accident was reported, what statutes were invoked to make the company liable, the categories of workers and the compensation amounts paid in the counter affidavits. The Additional Advocate General T. Rajanikanth Reddy informed the bench that all the issues raised in the PIL petition were being delved into and actions were initiated. He sought four weeks of time to file counter affidavits, stating that the authorities were awaiting reports of the High Level Committee and Expert Committee on the incident.
Indian Express
18 hours ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Sigachi factory blast: ‘It's a wake-up call,' Telangana HC says let law take its course, but ensure regulatory regime is strengthened
The Telangana High Court Thursday sought detailed affidavits from respective departments in three weeks regarding the explosion at Sigachi factory in Sangareddy district last month. The division bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin gave the direction while dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought a speedy investigation into the cause of the accident and the grant of compensation, among others, to the victims' kin. Forty-eight people died and eight people are missing since the Sigachi factory explosion. The bench stated that the affidavits should contain maximum details regarding the accident, steps taken so far, findings of committees, compensation paid so far, etc, while also stressing the need to mention the specific industrial and environmental laws that are applicable in the case. The petitioner contended that there have been no arrests in the case so far, compensation amounts have not been paid to the victims' kin, and that the investigation was not moving forward. The petition also sought that the case be transferred to a special investigation team (SIT) and that the reports furnished by the high-powered committees be released. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out that in a similar industrial accident in Andhra Pradesh on August 24, 2024, the state stood by the 16 deceased workers and made sure that the company paid Rs 1 crore compensation to their kin the very next day itself. After hearing the points raised by the petitioner's counsel, the Chief Justice observed that the court was more worried about the actions that need to be taken and, therefore, needed to know from the departments impleaded in the case what action was being taken in 'a tragedy of such a magnitude'. The counsel representing the state said the government appointed a six-member committee headed by the Chief Secretary on the same day of the accident. While the preliminary report was submitted, the state was awaiting the final inquiry report. The state government has also constituted an expert committee, whose findings are also awaited. The counsel added that 29 families of the deceased workers have been paid Rs 25 lakh each by the company, and the rest of the families were being paid the compensation amount today (Thursday). He also said that the state was giving Rs 10 lakh to the families of the deceased and Rs 5 lakh to the injured. Asked by the Chief Justice (CJ) if anyone has been apprehended so far in the case, the counsel replied in the negative. Responding to another question from the CJ, the counsel said only 11 workers were covered under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, and the rest were covered under the Employees' Compensation Act. The CJ then wanted to know the relevant laws and if action had been initiated against those responsible under each of the laws or not. 'The experience is that, in such cases, when detected due to some unfortunate incidents, it comes to light that the factory is showing only 10-20 workers, which is the minimum requirement of taking a license or showing it to the ESIC or provident fund authorities. But, actually, they are engaging many more poor people who don't know their entitlements under different industrial laws. So, this is the larger issue required to be regulated by the agencies,' the CJ observed. He then said, 'It does not happen suddenly overnight. It is because of lapses at different levels in the (regulatory) regime that these incidents happen. So, the outlook when we entertain such PILs is not only to find out the real cause and ensure that the law takes its own course, but to ensure that the regulatory regime under the different laws are actually enforced in respect of other such industries/factories operating within the state, in particular. 'This is a wake-up call. The scale of which is quite huge. That day, we were seeing in the news that every hour the count was going up. I didn't know I would have to deal with the PIL here. The agony is of all of us. As officers of the court and also representing the respective departments or boards. it is the duty of all of us to ensure that not only is action taken as per law, but also the regulatory regime becomes more strengthened. Then only it will happen.' Rahul V Pisharody is an Assistant Editor with the Indian Express Online and has been reporting from Telangana on various issues since 2019. Besides a focused approach to big news developments, Rahul has a keen interest in stories about Hyderabad and its inhabitants and looks out for interesting features on the city's heritage, environment, history culture etc. His articles are straightforward and simple reads in sync with the context. Rahul started his career as a journalist in 2011 with The New Indian Express and worked in different roles at the Hyderabad bureau for over 8 years. As Deputy Metro Editor, he was in charge of the Hyderabad bureau of the newspaper and coordinated with the team of district correspondents, centres and internet desk for over three years. A native of Palakkad in Kerala, Rahul has a Master's degree in Communication (Print and New Media) from the University of Hyderabad and a Bachelor's degree in Business Management from PSG College of Arts and Science, Coimbatore. Long motorcycle rides and travel photography are among his other interests. ... Read More
Time of India
a day ago
- Business
- Time of India
Telangana HC seeks fresh affidavit from heritage director on construction near Golconda fort
Hyderabad: The high court has directed the director of heritage, Telangana, who also serves as the competent authority under the National Monuments Authority (NMA), to file a fresh affidavit regarding the issuance of permission to a builder for construction on a 14-acre plot in Qila Mohammed Nagar, adjacent to the outer wall of the protected Golconda fort. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice P Sam Koshy issued the direction while hearing an appeal filed by a businessman challenging a March 2025 order passed by a single judge of the high court. The single judge had earlier directed the director of heritage to grant permission to the builder in accordance with the NMA's directives. During the hearing on Wednesday, Chief Justice Singh said: "The competent authority, is it a post office service or do they have some role in implementing the orders? There should be some application of mind." The Chief Justice further remarked that they do not have any issue with authorities implementing the orders, as long as they are in accordance with the law. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad The bench observed that the director of heritage had earlier opposed the builder's request in a counter-affidavit filed on June 21, 2021, but failed to file any subsequent updates clarifying whether those objections were addressed or if the builder had complied with necessary conditions. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo Meanwhile, the counsel for the appellant informed the court that the no-objection certificate granted to the builder by the NMA in April 2019 is currently under challenge in a public interest litigation pending before the high court. Taking note of these submissions and referring to relevant provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, the bench directed the competent authority to submit a clear affidavit confirming whether the builder fulfilled all requisite conditions. The matter has been posted for further hearing in two weeks.
