Andhra Pradesh Court November 1995 Judgments
inspector General of Police, Southern Sector, Crpf Vs. Lnk S.C. Sharma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT474
ORDERP.S. Mishra, C.J. 1. Writ Petitioner (S.C. Sharma) was an assistant commandant of Central Reserve Police Force at Hyderabad when he was subjected to an enquiry into the alleged misconduct of committing criminal assault upon a girl child, although, allegedly, the enquiry officer completely exonerated him the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Hyderabad (2nd appellant thought otherwise and finding fault with the enquiry ordered for a de novo enquiry and appointed a new enquiry officer. Writ petitioner-respondent (S.C. Sharma) participated in the enquiry which went against him and on the basis of the report of the enquiry, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F., passed order on 9-12-1992 imposing the punishment of reduction in rank, thus, relegating him to his original appointment as constable. Aggrieved by the order of punishment, Writ petitioner - respondent appealed to the Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F., (1st appellant). The Inspecto...
Tag this Judgment!B. Issac Prabhakar (Petitioner in W.P.22286/95) and E. Lokendranath (P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALT695
ORDERM.N. Rao, J.1. Common questions of facts and law arise for adjudication in this batch of five writ petitions and so they are disposed of by this common judgment. The seven petitioners in these five writ petitions were appointed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh by a notification issued in G.O.Ms.No.122, Transport, Roads and Buildings (Tr.III) Department, dated 28-7-1985 as Directors in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation under Section 5 of the The Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act'), for a period of two years from the date of the issue of the order. By another order in G.O.Ms.No.123 of the same date all the seven were appointed as Chairmen of Zonal Advisory Councils, the term of which was co-terminus with the term of the Board of Directors. By separate orders in the form of letters dated 25-9-1958 (sic. 25-9-1995, the Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh informed each of the petitioners as follows:'I am directed to state that it has b...
Tag this Judgment!Subba Lakshmi Vs. Hon'ble Labour Court-iii, Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT699
ORDERP.S. Mishra, C.J.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 management. 2. The question herein which has found a pronouncement against the employee in the writ petition is that in case the employee through his Advocate concedes that no objection is taken as to the validity of the domestic enquiry later the employee cannot ask the Labour Court or Industrial Tribunal before which the industrial dispute is pending adjudication, to lead evidence to show that domestic enquiry was invalid. We had the occasion to deal with a reverse case in which the employer wanted to lead evidence after such a concession by the learned Counsel for the employee and to consider the scope of Section III-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act'). In Writ Appeal No. 918 of 1995 after considering various pronouncements of the Supreme Court, we have held in our judgment that it is the duty of the Court or the Tribunal to decide whether domestic e...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. U. Ramakrishna and ors. Vs. Registrar, University of Health Scienc ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-1995
Reported in: 1996(3)ALT28
ORDERB. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. These Writ Petitions raise a very important point for consideration as to whether 2 years rural service for pre-1987 appointee Doctors or 3 years rural service for post-1987 Doctor appointees, which has been incorporated in the Notification issued by the University of Health Sciences, dated 3-5-1995 calling for applications for admission into Post-Graduate Medical Courses is valid or not?2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that this imposition is not valid for the reason that there is no rule which has been framed in exercise of the Rule-making power contained Under Section 3 read with Section 15 of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') Section 2 (c) of the Act defines 'educational institution' including the University and it is needless to mention that University of Health Sciences, which is one of the respondents in these cases, i...
Tag this Judgment!Julekha Bee and ors. Vs. O. Bali Reddy and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT730
1. This appeal is filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal in M.V.O.P. No. 22 of 1990, dated 25-2-1992 and to award compensation as claimed for by them. A few facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are as follows:- The deceased was a Class IV employee working in the Nandyal Branch of the State Bank of India drawing roughly about Rs. 3,000/- per month. On 30-4-1989 at about 7.30 p.m. the deceased and his friend were going on a Moped and the said vehicle was driven by the deceased. At a place near Bommalasatram, the tractor bearing registration No. AAQ 1178 came from the opposite direction and dashed against the moped. As a result of the impact, the deceased fell down from the moped and sustained serious injuries to which he succumbed while undergoing treatment in the Government General Hospital, Kurnool. At the time of his death, he was aged 39 years. The claimants filed an application under Sections 92...
Tag this Judgment!T. Rajender Singh Vs. Maya Devi Alias Gayatri and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALD(Cri)883; 1996(1)ALT928; 1996(1)APLJ318; 1996CriLJ2384; II(1996)DMC362; 1996(1)LS166
ORDER1. The present C.R.P. is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders of II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in I.A. No. 723/91 in I.A. No. 199/90 in O.P. No. 254/89 dated : 6-7-1992. 2. The facts which give rise to the present Petition are that the Petitioner (husband) filed O.P. No. 254/89 for dissolution of marriage. The respondent No. 1 (wife) filed application in I.A. No. 199/90 under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act for legal expenses and interim maintenance. The matrimonial Court on 21-9-90 passed orders granting Rs. 500/- towards legal expenses and Rs. 500/- towards maintenance to wife and child. 3. While so, the respondent No. 1 wife filed M.C. No. 12/90 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance for herself and her son before the VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The said application was allowed for Rs. 550/- on 6-2-1991. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 171/92 before t...
Tag this Judgment!Cheepinapi Venkata Subbamma Vs. Chejerla Naraiah and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT50
Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J. 1. The appellant herein is the original plaintiff. She had instituted a suit bearing No. O.S. 96 of 1986 in the Court of the Principal District Munsif, Kavali. The said suit was filed for setting aside the dismissal order passed in O.S. No. 303 of 1971 dated 3-10-1973. 2. It appears that O.S. No. 303 of 1971 was filed by the defendants 1 and 2 in O.S. No. 96 of 1986 against defendants 3 to 6 in the aforesaid suit. The plaintiffs in O.S. 303 of 1971 had filed the suit for declaration that they are the owners of the suit schedule property and they were allotted the suit schedule property in the partition, but possession was not given. The plaintiffs in the above suit had also claimed relief of possession. 3. It appears that during the pendency of O.S. No. 303 of 1971, the plaintiffs therein colluded with the defendants and the suit in question came to be dismissed in default. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, the suit schedule land was sold by the plainti...
Tag this Judgment!Lalitha Bai Vs. the Union of India (Uoi), Rep. by General Manager, S.C ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT568
B.S. Raikote, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant Lalitha Bai being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad, dated 17-6-1994 passed on O.A.A.No. 48 of 1991. By that order, the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant on the ground that the appellant has not proved negligence on the part of the respondent Railway Department. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant strenuously contended that the impugned award of the Railway Claims Tribunal is illegal and contrary to the evidence on record. He further submitted that on the basis of evidence on record, it is dear that the appellant has proved that there was negligence on the part of the Railway Department, as the result, the appellant met with the accident. Therefore, the finding of the Railway Claims Tribunal that the appellant has not proved the negligence on the part of the Railway Department is not correct and the same is liabl...
Tag this Judgment!Kamala Bai Marda and anr. Vs. R. Venkat Rajaiah (Died) Per Lrs
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT852
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J. 1. This revision petition is filed by landlord aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, dated 24-7-1989 in R.A.No. 22 of 1985 allowing the appeal and dismissing the landlord's eviction petition filed in R.C.No. 288 of 1979, dated 21-3-1985 on the file of the II Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad filed under Section 10(2) (i) and (iii) (a) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (in short 'the Act'). 2. A few facts which are necessary to dispose of this petition are as follows:- The petitioners have purchased House bearing No. 4-7-321 situated at Esamiya Bazar, Hyderabad from its earlier owner Madanagopal Rathi under a registered Sale Deed, dated 3-7-1979. The Respondent No.1 herein Sri P. Venkata Rajaiah was a tenant earlier under Madangopal and later, by virtue of sale in favour of the petitioners herein, tenancy was attorned. The house consists of three room...
Tag this Judgment!Gedela Suryanarayana Vs. Chairman, Visakhapatnam Port Trust and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1995
Reported in: 1995(3)ALT846
ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J.1. The Petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of Machinist Grade-I and Charge Hand in accordance with 40 points Roster with all consequential benefits.2. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe. He was initially appointed as Machinist Grade-Ill on 28-5-1979. The services were regularised on 10-6-1980. He worked on adhoc-basis as Machinist Grade-II for three months in the year 1980. He passed prescribed trade test for promotion to the post of Grade-II Machinist on 13-5-1981. Therefore, he was again promoted on adhoc-basis as Grade-II Machinist. His case is that he was continued on adhoc-basis in the same post and finally his probation was declared with effect from 21-11-1987. From the said date he is functioning as Machinist Grade II only and he is not being promoted to the Grade-I and Charge Hand in the points reserved for Sch...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »