Andhra Pradesh Court September 1997 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
P. Sesham Raju Vs. Hon'ble District and Sessions Judge and Ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-1997
Reported in: 1997(6)ALT105
S. Parvatha Rao, J.1. The petitioner states that he is working as Upper Division Clerk in the Special Judicial First Class Mobile Court, Manthani. He states that he was called for interview by the Selection Committee for promotion to the post of Head Clerk in District Munsif's Court in Category 3 in Division IV of the A.P. Judicial Ministerial Service (for short 'the Service')/ and that he appeared for the interview held on 31-8-1996. He was not selected but respondents 2 and 3 who were his juniors were selected. He contends that no reasons were given for overlooking him and that his meritorious service and seniority was not given weight by the Selection Committee and that respondents 2 and 3 who were less meritorious than him were selected ignoring his claims. He admits that, earlier, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him while he was working as Deputy Nazir in the Court of the Munsif Magistrate at Sultanabad and that punishment of stoppage of three increments without cu...
indupur Sudhir Reddy Vs. State of A.P. Rep. by Prl. Secretary to Govt. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALT89
ORDERLingaraja Rath, J.1. The question strenuously urged in this appeal is the entitlement of a minor son in a coparcenary who has become major after the notified date of the Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to a separate ceiling for himself under the Act. Though the question has been answered in the negative by a Bench decision of this Court in C.R.P. No. 1851 and 2042 of 1990, dated 28-8-1997, yet the claim of the petitioner, as submitted by the learned senior Counsel Sri M.V. Ramana Reddy appearing for him, on the plea of the Act though included in the IX Schedule of the Constitution yet does not have the immunity provided under Article 31-B of the Constitution of India, and that determination of ceiling without giving an independent ceiling to him amounts to compulsory acquisition of land within the ceiling area without paying market value compensation and hence for the reason the provision of determination of ceiling ...
Lakshmi Srinivasa Wines Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD64; 1997(6)ALT685
ORDERY. Bhaskar Rao, J 1. The writ petitions are filed assailing the letter dated 10-5-1995 issued by the Commissioner of Excise of Andhra Pradesh informing the petitioners that their applications for issue of through transport permits will be considered on condition that they should transport liquor in lorries, which are having doors and locking facility, through the State of Andhra Pradesh.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioners are all dealers in liquor at Yanam of Pondicherry State. The liquor is not manufactured at Yanam. The petitioners purchase liquor from Pondicherry and other States and they obtain export permits from the States where liquor is purchased. They also obtain import permit from the State of Pondicherry. Since they transport the liquor to Yanam through the State of Andhra Pradesh, they apply for issue of through transport permits. The applications are rejected with anendorsement that in future the petitioners have to transport liquor in closed containers ...
K.G. Jagannath and anr. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD67
ORDERV. Rajagopala Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the State Carriage permit holder of aii inter-State route plying the state carriage from Bangalore of Karnataka State to Ananthapur of A.P.State. He applied for variation of the permit for increase of two single trips and inclusion of one additional vehicle to ply on the said route and obtained a favourable order from the Kamataka State Transport Authority on a condition that he should obtain counter-signature of the State Transport Authority of A.P. He has therefore applied to the State Transport Authority of A.P. for counter-signature and the State Transport Authority, Hyderabad, passed an order dated 15-6-1984 granting counter-signature. Aggrieved by the order, the Karnataka State Transport Authority, Bangalore, filed R.P.No.111/85 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., Hyderabad. It was argued before the Tribunal that the State Transport Authority, Hyderabad,had no jurisdiction to grant or counter-sign variation and tha...
Bovaiah and ors. Vs. District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Sangaredd ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD201; 1997(6)ALT738
ORDERN.Y. Hanumanthappa, J. 1. Since the question of law involved in all these petitions, the same are clubbed and disposed of by this Common Order.2. The points for consideration in these writ petitions are, (i) whether the employees working in a Cooperative Bank on their termination or if their service conditions are in any way affected by the order passed by the Cooperative Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'Bank'), to redress their grievances, are they have to raise a dispute as contemplated under the provisions of Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 or straightaway challenge the same before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (ii) whether placing an employee on higher pedestal by way of officiation will confer any right on him andasking him to go back to the original post will amount to termination ?3. In order to answer the above questions, it is proper to narrate a few facts.4. Respondents No.1, namely, the District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, constituted ...
S. Pratap Reddy Vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Hyderabad and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD620
ORDER1. In this writ petition the petitioner challenges the award of the Labour Court which upheld the order of dismissal from service passed against him by the management. While the petitioner was serving as Assistant Grade-I in the first respondent company, a charge-sheet was issued to him on 17-12-1983 to the effect that he failed to check and scrutinise the L.T.C. claims properly and passed claims of some employees knowing them to be fraudulent which resulted in payments to employees for which they are not entitled and thereby caused pecuniary loss to the company. It was further alleged that he had received Rs.1836/- from one Satyanarayana as illegal gratification for having got his L.T.C. bill passed by his colleague Chalapathi JKao for Rs,3036/-knowing fully well that Sri Satyanarayana had already availed L.T.C. for 1982-83. An Enquiry Officer was appointed to hold enquiry into the said charges. After conducting enquiry the Enquiry Officer submitted a report holding the charges t...
M. Ramana Kumari and ors. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Guntu ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(2)ALD110; 1998(2)ALT439
ORDER1. Aggrieved by the proceedings in Rc.No. B3/8454/93 E.O.'s Estt. dated 21-10-1993 issued by the first respondent, the present writ petition is filed.2. All these petitioners claim that they have been appointed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Guntur through various proceedings in various postssomewhere in the year 1993 and they have been discharging their duties since then.While so, these petitioners allege that the present incumbent in the first respondent-office sought to terminate their services through the impugned proceedings on the instructions of the Commissioner, Endowments Department which action according to the petitioners is illegal inasmuch as the first respondent has no authority to terminate their services without giving notice to them and seek appropriate direction including quashing of the impugned proceedings.3. The First respondent has failed a separate counter. The counter filed on behalf of the fifth respondent has been adopted by other respondents a...
N.V. Chowdary Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: AIR1998AP83; 1997(6)ALT24
ORDERD.H. Nasir, J.1. A very short question arises for our consideration in this Civil Revision Petition whether the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act could be pressed into service in spite of categorical exclusionof Order XXI, C.P.C. from the applicability of the said provisions of the Act.2. Section 5 of the Limitation Act reads as under :--'5. Extension of prescribed period in certain cases :-- Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.'3. According to the learned Counsel for the Decree-Holder/Petitioner, the real question before the Court was whether a review petition could be entertained in respect of any order passed by the Court in any proceeding under Order XXI of the Civil Pr...
Rongali Deemudu Vs. Pothula Deemudamma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-1997
Reported in: 1998(3)ALD225; 1998(1)ALT371
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent.2. This C.R.P. is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Principal District Munsif, Chodavaram in O.S.No. 15 of 1990, dated 27-3-1995.3. The only question which arises for our consideration in this revision-petition is whether the petitioner-defendant was the cultivating tenant over the disputed land for a long time and there was no question of the respondent-plaintiff having been forcibly dispossessed within six months prior to the date of institution of the suit.4. The respondent-plaintiff's case before the lower Court was, in brief, as follows :The plaintiff was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the disputed land till 3rd week of November, 1989 and at that time she was dispossessed by the petitioner-defendant forcibly otherwise than in accordance with law. A dispute was raised in the presence of the elders and the plaintiff lodged a complaint with the police but it...
K. Venkata Syamappa and anr. Vs. District Collector, Ananthapur and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)ALD7
1. In a land acquisition case, the land outers (petitioners) of Ac.2-00 in Survey No.l27/16A of Gollapuram village, Hindupur mandal, Anantapur district, are challenging the land acquisition proceedings mainly on the ground that the proceedings are vitiated on account of award not having been passed during the prescribed period of two years from the last date of publication of declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act').2. While furnishing particulars of the publication of notices as required by law, the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare and Labour, brought to the attention of the Court that declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published in the Gazette on 8-5-1994 and in the concerned locality it was published on 9-6-1994. The Award was declared on 25-5-1996. Hence, there was no question of the proceedings having been vitiated because from 9-6-1994 which was the last date of publication, the passing of the award which took place ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »