- Tabu, Kareena, Kriti's 'Crew' Teaser Takes Internet by Storm, trending No 1 on YouTube
- Promoting gender equality at workplace
- Things married couples could do in secret
- Croatia’s Luciaja Begic wins Miss World Sports Challenge
- VH not to give up his Khammam MP ambitions
- Priyanka likely to launch two schemes ‘virtually’
- TTD hikes salaries of 9,000 contract employees
- Andhra Cricket Association addresses Hanuma Vihari's claims regarding Prudhvi Raj, new allegations arise.
- Actor Kenneth Mitchell, Known for 'Star Trek' and 'Captain Marvel', Passes Away at 49
- White Paper on Dharani portal soon: Revenue Minister
HC closes contempt cases against railway officials
A two judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad comprising Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice M Satyanarayana Murthy on Wednesday closed two contempt cases filed against the General Manager of South Central Railways Basit Ahmed and others.
Hyderabad: A two judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad comprising Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice M Satyanarayana Murthy on Wednesday closed two contempt cases filed against the General Manager of South Central Railways Basit Ahmed and others.
The petitioners complained to the court that the officials had proceeded with a motion by providing reservations for the Dalits and Scheduled Tribes without carrying out an exercise of examining the need to provide such reservation to promotion posts.
The petitioners contended that they had lost out on promotions in three specific categories. The categories were loco-pilots (passenger), Assistant Engineer and Assistant Divisional Engineer. K R K V Prasad, counsel for the petitioner, argued that under the guise of making ad hoc arrangement, the railway authorities continued with the practice.
Senior Counsel Ravichander, appearing for the railways, pointed out that the High Court had permitted the railways to make ad hoc arrangements and the expression promotion was used instead of ad hoc arrangement. The counsel submitted to the court that it should not be construed as willful or wanton violation of court orders. The bench also noticed that the management made its necessary corrections, had offered its apologies and closed the contempt case.