Accommodation for AP HC to be ready by Dec. ’18 4-week time for language pundits

The AP government on Monday informed the Supreme Court that the accommodation for establishment of a High Court for the state would be ready in December 2018.

A two-member bench comprising Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan was hearing an appeal by the Centre which challenged the order of the Hyderabad High Court in holding that the permanent High Court should be constructed only within AP. The Hyderabad High Court had also held that there was no provision under the law to set up a High Court for AP temporarily in Hyderabad.

The bench had earlier directed the AP government to spell out its stand in establishing the High Court either in AP or in Hyderabad when the Centre said that the existing High Court at Hyderabad had a sufficient number of court halls for the two High Courts to function separately.

The Centre contended that as per the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014, Hyderabad was the common capital for both states for 10 years and such an arrangement could be made.

AP government counsel said the accommodation for the High Court would readied by December in AP. Counsel appearing for the Telangana state government submitted that for the last four years the AP government was making such statements. Counsel for the Centre submitted that though it had released `500 crore in March 2015, the state government had not take up the construction. Expressing displeasure at the authorities for delaying admissions into language pandit institutions for 2018-19, the Hyderabad High Court on Monday directed the principal secretary and the chairman, Language Pandits Common Entrance Test and Director of School Education to complete the counselling within four weeks.

Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy was dealing with a petition by Mr S. Balaraju and four others challenging the action of the authorities in not conducting counselling despite holding the LPCET on May 16, and its results on June 3, as illegal.

Mr Arjun Kumar, counsel for the petitioner, told the court that the authorities had not conducted the LPCET for the past two academic years. This time they had conducted the test only after the intervention of the court and were now dodging counselling.

While questioning the authorities for delaying the counselling and making the students to roam around courts, the judge directed completion of the counselling process within four weeks.