Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 48 - 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 56Nominal IndexTelangana Hospitals and Nursing Homes Association & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 48Late Padmashree Dr. B.S. Choubey Memorial Trust & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 49The Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v. M/s. B. Ram Reddy Infra & Ors. , 2026 LiveLaw (Tel)...
Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 48 - 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 56
Nominal Index
Telangana Hospitals and Nursing Homes Association & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 48
Late Padmashree Dr. B.S. Choubey Memorial Trust & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 49
The Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v. M/s. B. Ram Reddy Infra & Ors. , 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 50
Sri. Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao vs. State of Telangana, 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 51
Salman Mahmood v. State of Telangana & others, 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 52
V. Anil Kumar & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Ors. and connected matters, 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 53
Sanjay Agarwal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 54
The Singareni Collieries Company Limited & Ors. v. Madurakavi Kistaiah & Anr. and connected matters, 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 55
Dr. M & another v. Union of India & another, 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 56
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case Title: Telangana Hospitals and Nursing Homes Association & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 48
The Telangana High Court has upheld the validity of Guideline No.14 of Central Pollution Control Board's (CPCB) Guidelines for Common Bio-Medical Waste Treatment and Disposal Facilities, 2025 and the consequential Telangana Pollution Control Board (TGPCB) circular adopting a “per bed per day” user-charge model for bedded hospitals.
In doing so the court held that the classification between bedded and non-bedded healthcare facilities is founded on an intelligible differentia and bears a rational nexus with the object of efficient and sustainable biomedical waste management.
Payment Of Cheque Amount Before First Hearing Warrants Quashing Of NI Act Case: Telangana High Court
Case Title: Late Padmashree Dr. B.S. Choubey Memorial Trust & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Anr.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 49
The Telangana High Court has quashed three cheque dishonour cases against a trust and its office-bearers, observing that the trust had paid the entire cheque amount before the first date of hearing and so continuation of the prosecutions would amount to abuse of process of law.
Justice Tirumala Devi Eada observed:
“It is pertinent to observe in this regard that the objective of the N.I. Act is to safeguard the interest of the business community, where under several transactions occur by giving and taking cheques and in case of their default in payment, the party who acts upon the said promise of payment should not be put to loss. In the present case, admittedly, the amounts covered under the cheques are already paid. The only contention of learned counsel for respondent No.2 is with regard to payment of interest/fine/ compensation".
Case Name: The Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v. M/s. B. Ram Reddy Infra & Ors.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 50
The Telangana High Court has held that in commercial suits, the 120-day period for filing defendant's written statement under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) begins from the date of service of summons along with the plaint, and not from the later date when annexed documents are furnished to the defendant.
Holding that the Commercial Court had rightly forfeited the defendants' right to file written statements after expiry of the statutory period, a Division Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar observed:
“The discussion in the above paragraphs leads us to the inevitable view that the amended second proviso to Order V Rule 1 and the amended proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 read with Order VIII Rule 10 of the CPC cast a mandate on the defendant to file its Written Statement within 30 days from the date of service of summons on that defendant and thereafter within 90 days (i.e., a total of 120 days) from the date of service of summons. The gates stand closed after the period of 120 days since the right to file a Written Statement stands forfeited. The Court is also divested of its power to extend the time beyond 120 days for filing of the Written Statement for suits involving a commercial dispute.
Case Title: Sri. Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao vs. State of Telangana
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 51
The Telangana High Court on Wednesday (April 22) partly allowed pleas filed by former chief minister and BRS head K Chandrashekar Rao, former irrigation minister T. Harish Rao and others challenging the Inquiry Commission Report over alleged irregularities into the Kaleshwaram project.
In doing so the court held that those findings against the petitioners which have been rendered in violation of safeguards provided under Section 8(B) of Commissions of Inquiry Act, shall not be acted upon. For context, Section 8B mandates that notice be issued to any individual, likely to be affected by the findings on the report, documents be served on them and they be given a chance to defend themselves and cross-examine the witnesses. The petitioners herein are K Chandrashekar Rao(KCR) , T. Harish Rao (THR) and retired IAS officer Shailendra Kumar Joshi as well as IAS officer Smita Sabharwal serving in Telangana.
Case Title: Salman Mahmood v. State of Telangana & others
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 52
The Telangana High Court has held that a postgraduate medical student who fails even one theory paper cannot seek permission to re-appear only in that paper, and must instead re-appear for all four theory papers along with practical/clinical and viva voce examinations, in terms of the regulatory scheme governing PG medical education.
Referring to the provisions of Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations 2023, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka observed:
“The regulatory framework, as placed on record, clearly establishes that the Post Graduate medical examination is a composite and integrated assessment consisting of multiple components, namely theory (four papers), practical/clinical and viva voce, and that each of these components constitutes a 'head of passing'… Once a candidate fails to meet the prescribed minimum in any one component, the result is declared as 'failed', and the candidate is required to undergo the process of re-assessment in accordance with the regulatory scheme.”
Case Title: V. Anil Kumar & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Ors. and connected matters
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 53
The Telangana High Court has said that distance education degrees obtained by students through study centres outside the university's jurisdiction are not valid.
In doing so the court upheld the rejection of candidates seeking appointment as Librarian under a government notification, who had obtained Masters in Library Science through distance education from Acharya Nagarjuna University–the jurisdiction of which was confined to Andhra Pradesh, but via study centres located in Telangana.
Case Title: Sanjay Agarwal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 54
The Telangana High Court has held that a single-member Bench of the Adjudicating Authority under PMLA can validly pass orders confirming provisional attachment and permitting retention of seized material.
In doing so, it held that at that stage the standard is only one of prima facie satisfaction on the basis of material on record, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Case Title: The Singareni Collieries Company Limited & Ors. v. Madurakavi Kistaiah & Anr. and connected matters
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 55
The Telangana High Court has held that specific, measurable and permanent disabilities arising from injury or disease cannot be pushed into the residual category of “general physical debility” (a state of weakness or infirmity) under Clause 9.4.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA)-VI.
In doing so the court granted relief to five medically invalidated Singareni workers and held that they must be treated under Clause 9.4.0(i), which carries entitlement to dependent employment. Clause 9.4.0(i) grants employment to one dependent of a worker who is permanently disabled in his place.
Case Title: Dr. M & another v. Union of India & another
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 56
The Telangana High Court granted relief to a married woman suffering from Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS) [missing uterus and ovaries], denied an eligibility certificate for surrogacy on the ground that her cytogenetic report showed a '46 XY karyotype' disqualifying her under the relevant rules.
In doing so the court said that denying her an opportunity for surrogacy on ground of her not being a "perfect woman" in against the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021.