Live
- Aishwarya Rai Bachchan’s Sister-in-Law Shrima Rai Shares Cryptic Post After Taking a Dig at Her
- Karnataka: Congress ministers indulge in lobbying ahead of Cabinet reshuffle
- Tur, urad prices have fallen in last 3 months: Govt
- NASA Alert: 130-ft Asteroid 2024 WQ2 Racing Past Earth at Over 62,000 km/h – Should We Be Concerned?
- What is UNSC Resolution 1701 and How it Relates to the Israel-Lebanon Ceasefire
- CM Mohan Majhi reviews preparedness at BJP state office ahead of PM Modi's visit
- Lisandro Martinez available for selection against Bodo/Glimt confirms Amorim
- Shivakumar appeals Union Forest Minister to expedite environmental clearance for Kalasa-Banduri project
- V Jagadishwar Goud Inspects Development in Serilingampalli Constituency
- Hyderabad Water Board Cracks Down on Illegal Nalla Connections, Orders Criminal Cases
HC demanded clarity in the K T Jaleel case
Clarification was sought as the matter requires a detailed admission hearing and the petitioner has to furnish these important details for the court to hear the petition, the order said.
The high court demanded transparency in the case claiming failure on the part of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) in registering an FIR in the row over appointment of minister K T Jaleel's relative K T Adeeb as general manager at Minorities Development Finance Corporation.
Justice P Ubaid ordered that the petitioner, P K Firos, Muslim Youth League general secretary, should explain on seven points ahead of the court considering the scope for a prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The petitioner should inform the court whether anybody has so far challenged the deputation appointment, whether there was a government order by which required qualification was diluted, whether sanction for prosecution has been obtained, whether the appointment is regular or on deputation, whether the appointee derived any undue advantage or illegal benefit other than admissible salary and benefits, whether the complaint filed before VACB contains the essentials of any criminal misconduct as defined under Prevention of Corruption Act, and whether the grievance is only about violation of rules in the appointment process.
