The High Court on Friday issued non-bailable warrants to Mandal Parishad Development Officer of Shamirpet and secretary of Majidpur gram panchayat of Medchal Malkajgiri district who did not turn up before the HC despite a specific direction issued on November 18.
A Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti, passing the order, instructed the police officer concerned to arrest the MPDO and village secretary, and produce them before it on December 11.
The Bench was hearing a PIL petition filed by a resident of Majidpur on Hyderabad’s northern outskirts. The petitioner said in his plea that he complained to the authorities about the illegal constructions being carried out in survey nos. 40 and 48 of the village.
According to him, the illegal structures were being raised with the support of the village panchayat secretary. He maintained that he had complained about the inaction of the village secretary to the District Collector but no action was initiated in the matter. When the matter was heard first time on June 20, the HC directed the MPDO and the village secretary to present a status report on removal of the illegal structures.
On July 31, the counsel for the officials sought an adjournment. For the second consecutive time adjournment was sought on July 31. Even on August 8, the status report was not filed, the Bench noted.
The PIL plea came up for hearing again on November 18. Even on that day, no status report was filed. No explanation too was given as to why the order specifically issued by the HC was not complied with.
Taking a serious note of this, the Bench instructed the MPDO and the village secretary to personally appear before it on Friday. However, both the respondents did not appear before the HC. They did not file any status report also. Expressing serious concern over their non-compliance of the court direction, the Bench issued non-bailable warrants to them.
The Bench said the explanation of the government counsel that they could not appear due to election duty was nothing but avoiding implementation of the court order. The HC issued order in June but coming up with an excuse that it could not be complied with due to elections in November was not acceptable, the Bench said.
