A division bench wants statewide infant-custody numbers in a fortnight after nine Suryapet recoveries, and asks why parentage is still blank.

A Telangana High Court division bench on Monday, 24 August 2026, asked the State for statewide numbers on infants taken into protective custody and recorded that biological parents of nine children recovered in Suryapet have still not been identified. This cutting is the Monday listing. It is not a rewrite of the already-shipped Kalyana Lakshmi G.O. Ms. No. 4 cheque card listed the same week. The two writs stay two writs.

The bench was Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin. Other public accounts spell the second judge Ghouse Meera Mohiuddin. This desk records both name forms and will not pick one silently.

Nine children were recovered in Suryapet. One public account lists their ages as 10 months, 9 months, three years, 18 months, seven months, 18 months, three years, two months and 27 months. The same account, and another, put the range at two months to three years. This desk will keep the named ages and the range together. It will not invent a tenth child or merge the list into a single invented average age. The children were produced before the Child Welfare Committee, Suryapet, and shifted to Nalgonda for want of shelter. Another public account names the destination as Shishu Gruha, Nalgonda. Both geographies sit on the Monday cards. A shift for want of shelter is not an adoption order.

The court recorded that police have not identified biological parents despite anganwadi and school machinery. One public account of the Monday listing says the investigation was not effective. That is the bench’s recorded dissatisfaction. It is not a finished criminal finding against a named accused. The Child Welfare Committee was faulted for uploading the nine on the Central Adoption Resource Authority portal before the Social Investigation Report, which was submitted only in June 2026. An upload before the report is the fault the bench named. It is not a finding that the nine have been given in adoption.

The bench directed statewide data within a fortnight on children taken into protective custody from suspected illegal possession or purchase; children in protective homes; and beneficiaries of sponsorship and foster-care. Foster-care is recorded at ₹4,000 a month per child. Reports are to be signed not below Director or Additional Secretary. Social Welfare and Home are to be impleaded with Women and Child Welfare. The next listing is 2 September 2026. A fortnight and 2 September are the two clocks on the Monday order. This desk will not collapse them into one invented deadline.

One public account records the Chief Justice saying the issue may not be confined to Suryapet and might need a separate suo motu public-interest litigation. That is a judicial caution about scope. It is not a notified new petition this desk will invent. The Chief Justice cited a village-committee model of about 27,000 from his Jharkhand oversight, referring to a visually challenged Indian Administrative Service officer. About 27,000 is the figure on that account. The officer is not named on the opened cards. None will be invented.

The petitioner on one public account is Muthuneni Venkanna of Suraram, Nalgonda, a farmer seeking custody after a single-judge dismissal. A dismissed single-judge plea and a division-bench data order are the Monday record. Organ-trafficking and begging risk is the bench’s caution. It is not a proved fact. This desk will not write a trafficking conviction the Monday listing does not record.

Hyderabad’s High Court is the hearing geography. Suryapet is the recovery geography. Nalgonda and Shishu Gruha are the shelter geography. Form B and any civic-poll date are not notified on this file. Two September is a High Court listing. It is not an Assembly sitting and it is not an election notification.

Until the fortnightly data arrives and the 2 September listing writes the next order, the public ledger is nine Suryapet recoveries with ages from two months to three years, a Child Welfare Committee upload before a June 2026 Social Investigation Report, unidentified biological parents, a court line that the investigation was not effective, statewide custody and foster-care numbers due in a fortnight at ₹4,000 a month per child, reports to be signed not below Director or Additional Secretary, an implead of Social Welfare and Home, a possible separate suo motu petition flagged but not notified, a 27,000 village-committee citation from Jharkhand, and a petitioner named Muthuneni Venkanna. Every trafficking word on this card remains a caution, not a proved offence.