The Telangana High Court has directed the state government to establish fair, rational, and reasonable criteria for granting media accreditation to working journalists, without regard to the language of their publications. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti reviewed the validity of Government Order No. 239 issued on July 15, 2016, which allocated accreditation cards based on the language of newspapers. The court ruled this criterion as arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
The High Court emphasized that the language of a newspaper, regardless of its circulation numbers, cannot justify differential treatment in media accreditation. Instead, the bench suggested that accreditation criteria should consider factors such as circulation numbers or the number of pages in a publication to ensure fairness.
In a separate matter, the Telangana High Court has appointed senior counsel P Sri Raghu Ram as amicus curiae in a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning delays in admissions to law courses for the academic year 2023-24. The petitioner, A Bhaskar Reddy, argued that delays in commencing law courses are unreasonable and discriminatory. He contended that despite the Law Common Entrance Test being conducted in early June, delayed counseling notifications typically result in the academic year starting as late as October or November. The petitioner asserted that such delays contravene Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as principles of natural justice, and requested the court to direct the authorities to commence law courses by July.
Additionally, Justice B Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed the assistant government pleader for Home to seek instructions on a writ petition filed by C S Sudeeb from Saidabad. The petition urges enforcement of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, in accordance with the Animal Welfare Board of India’s circular dated August 14, 2020. The petitioner emphasized the need for prompt registration of FIRs in cases of animal cruelty to act as a deterrent. The court adjourned the hearing for a week to allow time for the government to provide instructions on the matter.