Andhra Pradesh Court April 1997 Judgments

K. Chandramma Vs. Labour Court-i, Hyderabad and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(3)ALD665; 1997(3)ALT406; 1997(2)APLJ52; (1997)IILLJ992AP

P.S. Mishra, C.J. 1. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, since we are inclined to interfere with the judgment and the award in I. D. No. 350 of 1993 dated August 24, 1995 and propose to remit the matter to the Labour Court for re-hearing of the case and disposal of the same in accordance with law, we do not intend to express ourselves in respect of all such matters which are to he gone mto in the proceeding and in respect of which, Labour Court as well as learned single Judge in W. P. No. 30081 of 1995 has recorded some findings. 2. The relevant facts are as follows : The petitioner-appellant worked under the second and third respondents, who represent the Hyderabad Metro Water Works and Sewerage Board. When she was removed from service and she raised Industrial Dispute, one of the pleas to be decided was whether she worked for a continuous period of 240 days and in view of that, she was entitled to be retained in service until action was taken in accordance with Section 25F...

M. Koteswara Rao Vs. Apsrtc, Tirupati and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(3)ALD491; 1997(3)ALT68; (1997)IILLJ489AP

ORDER1. This is a classic case of the disciplinary proceedings & groaning under insurmountable intricate technicalities of service jurisprudence. 2. The petitioner landed before this Court seeking number of reliefs. But, however, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the challenge is only to the order of removal passed by the 5th respondent dated August 19, 1996 and the modified order of the 4th respondent dated November 12, 1996 reverting the petitioner to the post of Traffic Inspector Grade-I for a period of 18 months. 3. The relevant facts leading to the case are is that the petitioner was working as Chief Inspector (Enquiries) at the Regional Office, at Tirupathi. According to the petitioner, he made a request to the 2nd respondent -Regional Manager to change the Steno-Typist working with the petitioner as he was not maintaining secrecy of information. When he made such a request, the 2nd respondent for the reasons best known to him lost his temper and insulted in his...

Ganga Bishan Shada Fruit Co. and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(3)ALT437

B. Subhashan Reddy, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed apprehending the launching of prosecution under Section 23 of the A.P. Agricultural (Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 (for short 'the Act') for violation of the provisions contained under Section 7(5) of the Act.2. It is not in dispute that for the previous years prosecutions had been launched, but they ended in acquittal in view of the Judgment rendered by the Court of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad in C.C. No. 618 of 1988. The said Judgment was based on a Judgment of this Court dated 29-4-1993 rendered in Criminal Appeals No. 1075 of 1992 and batch on the ground that there were no formats prescribed for submission of the returns. Even though Mr. P. Gangaiah Naidu, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners, being the Commission Agents, are not obligated to file any returns for the reason that the tak patties are submitted from time to time by remitting the amounts mentioned therein, w...

V. Aruna and Others Vs. Shalivahana Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

A. Venkatarami Reddy, President: 1. The District Forum, Hyderabad by a common order in OP 47/94, OP 418/94, OP 423/ 94 and 424/94 dated 25.9.1995 directed the first opposite party i.e. Shalivahana Builders Private Ltd., in OP 47/94 to refund Rs. 1 lakh with interest @ 18% p.a. from various dates therein with costs of Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- in OP 418/94 with interest @ 18% p.a. from 2.7.1990 and costs of Rs. 1,000/-, and Rs. 60,000/- in OP 423/94 with interest @ 18% p.a. from 10.6.1991 with costs of Rs. 1,000/- and to refund to the complainant a sum of Rs. 70,000/- in OP 424/94 with interest @ 18% p.a. from various dates therein and Rs. 1,000/- towards costs. 2. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainants in OP 418/94 preferred FA 188/96 and the complainant in OP 423/94 preferred FA 358/96. 3. Since these two appeals arose out of a common order, they are being disposed of a common order. 4. According to the complainants in both the complaints, the second opposite party is the ow...

T. Ramadas Vs. Collector and District Magistrate, Hyd.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(1)ALD359

ORDERP.S. Mishra, C.J. 1. These two petitions - one invoking Article 215 and the oilier Article 226 of the Constitution of India - are primarily addressed to the alleged demolition of a compound wall, which, according to the petitioner, was constructed after proper sanction and regular litigation in this behalf before this Court and an order in W.P.M.PNo.33868 of] 996, dated 23-12-1996. According to the petitioner, property bearing H.No.6-2-805/5, situate in Thummalabasthi, Khairatabad Hyderabad, belongs to him. He has purchased the said property under a registered deed of sale, dated 20-9-1993. He made application for permission to carry out reconstruction of the premises, which existed upon the same from before and after obtaining necessary permission from the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, started the work. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Golconda, however, arrived all of a sudden and look away all construction materials and implements. Aggrieved by the above and his refusal to ret...

Bharat Metal Box Co. Vs. Cegat, Madras

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(59)ECC499; 1998(98)ELT68(AP)

Lingaraja Rath, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner questions the decision of the respondent-CEGAT allowing the appeal of the Revenue and reversing the decision of the Collector of Central Excise dropping the demands raised against the petitioner but levying the penalty as well as duty for having wrongly availed Modvat credit in respect of certain inputs brought in its Bollaram Unit. 2. Brief narration of the facts are that the petitioner has two Units, one of Chaknavadi and the other of Bollaram respectively referred to as Units 1 and 2. The petitioner addressed a letter to the Collector, Central Excise on 18th November, 1996, informing him the different types of raw materials (inputs) that are used in or in relation to the manufacture of their final products and that all these raw materials are received and taken into account in Unit 2. All the requirements of raw materials at Unit 1 is met by Unit 2. Prior to 1-3-1986, no account in F...

Mukka Narasimha Reddy and ors. Vs. Government of A.P., Rep. by Its Sec ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(4)ALT139

ORDERLingaraja Rath, J.1. The question urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is the non-maintainability of revision before the Government in the matter of bifurcation of Gram Panchayat at the instance of a private person. Vaddimadugu Gram Panchayat was sought to be bifurcated but in view of the unanimous resolution of the Gram Panchayat opposing it, the Collector, Prakasam District decided against it. A revision before the Government was carried by one G. Raghurami Reddy which was allowed. Writ Petition No. 11430 of 1995, filed assailing the revisional order was allowed on 18-12-1995 directing the Government to give notice to the Gram Panchayat before passing order on the revision petition. The Government, after issuing notice to the Gram Panchayat, again confirmed the bifurcation, challenging which the present writ petition has been filed. The revision petitioner having not been made a party, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead him as the 4th resp...

Kathi Lokayya and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its S ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(3)ALT527

ORDERLingaraja Rath, J.1. The sole point urged in this Writ petition, assailing the decision of the Government upholding the bifurcation of the Guruzala Gram Panchayat by carving out the village Jangamaheshwarapuram from it, to form it as a separate Gram Panchayat, is that the distance between the two villages, Guruzala and Jangamaheshwarapuram is only 400 metres. It is the submission of the learned Counsel Sri Ravindranath Reddy, appearing for the petitioner that under G.O.Ms. No. 515, dated 17-8-1994 which was subsequently amended by G.O.Ms. Nos. 272 and 273 dated 18-5-1995 the distance between the two villages must be 2 K.ms. for the purpose of bifurcation. It is his argument that as the two villages are only 400 metres apart, there could not have been a bifurcation.2. The facts are that originally to a proposal of the Collector for bifurcation of the Gram Panchayat, a unanimous resolution was passed by the Gram Panchayat opposing the bifurcation which was accepted by the Collector ...

Food Corporation of India Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1999]115STC148(AP)

ORDERLingaraja Rath, J.1. The question raised in this revision is whether the value of the broken rice, husk and rice bran, which are by-products of the paddy given by the petitioner to different millers for milling, is to be added to the turnover of the petitioner for the purpose of computation of sales tax treating such by-products to have been sold by the petitioner to the millers. The petitioner entered into agreements with different millers to whom it supplies paddy for the purpose of milling and pays hire charges and milling charges to the millers. The impugned judgment of the Tribunal shows that as per the milling agreement the petitioner had agreed to give the by-products to the millers towards hire charges and receive only rice, at a certain percentage from out of the paddy delivered for milling. The assessing officer and the Appellate Deputy Commissioner as also the Tribunal held the by-products to have been sold by the petitioner to the millers and hence the value of by-prod...

Sanagavarapu Venkata Subbaiah Sarma Vs. Karuthota Galib Saheb and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1997(4)ALT274

Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. O.S. No. 56 of 1973 was filed by the plaintiff-appellant herein in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Ongole. A.S. No. 787 of 1983 arises out of O.S. No. 56 of 1973. Transfer A.S. No. 2760 of 1985 arises out of O.S. No. 28 of 1977 on the file of the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Ongole. Transfer A.S. No. 2758 of 1985 arises out of O.S. No. 30 of 1977 on the file of the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Ongole. O.S. No. 28 of 1977 was filed by one Battula Suryanarayana, who was the plaintiff in the suit. O.S. No. 30 of 1977 was also filed by Battula Suryanarayana. All the suits were disposed of by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Ongole by a common judgment. O.S. No. 56 of 1973 was dismissed in respect of B to F schedule properties. It was declared that the plaintiff is entitled to recover possession of A schedule properties from the 6th defendant therein except the properties settled on the 6th defendant under Ex.B-9. The plaintiff was allowed to file a...