Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD449; 1998(6)ALT74
ORDERP. Ramakrishnam Raju, J.1. In this Batch of writ petitions, the Constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Rural Development Act, 1996 is being challenged as violativc of Article 286(2) of the Constitution of India on the ground that the State Legislature is not competent under any of the entries in list II of the VII Schedule to the Constitution to levy Rural Development Cess and consequently to quash the individual demands issued by the first respondent demanding cess from the writ petitioners.2. Most of the petitioners are registered firms, while some of them are individual traders engaged in the business of rice milling. Theyare regularly submitting returns to the Commercial Tax authorities reflecting their turnovers of purchase of paddy as well as sale of rice every year and accordingly tax is being paid. While so, the State of Andhra Pradesh enacted A.P. Rural Development Act, 1996 - hereinafter called 'the Act' purporting to levy cess which is in the nature of a tax whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD169; 1998(6)ALT382
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings in Rc.No 357/R & T/Admn/1-96 dated 15-3-1997 issued by the first respondent and advertised in English Daily-Deccan Chronicle on 9-2-1997 as being illegal, arbitrary and violativc of Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India.2. Earlier, this writ petition was disposed of by me by judgment and order dated 15-4-1998. In the appeal preferred by the official respondents in Writ Appeal No. 1012 of 1998, the Division Bench of this Court has set aside the judgment dated 154-1998 by remanding the matter to the learned single Judge for being considered afresh.3. Heard the learned Counsel on bothsides.4. The short grievance of the petitioner, as made out, in the affidavit in support of the writ petition is that the impugned notification dated 15-3-1997 providing reservation, in favour of orthopaedically handicapped personsis illegal being in contravention to Rule 22(2) (b) of the Andhra Pradcsh State and Subordinate Service Rule...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD161; 1998(6)ALT264
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. T.S. Harinath, the learned Standing Counsel for the KakatiyaUniversity.2. Both the Counsel agreed to dispose of the main writ petitions.3. The only point urged before me by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were admitted for first year MBA course in 3rd respondent college which is affiliated to the 1st respondent-University. The procedure for granting of admissions to the candidates, is not disputed before me. Theprocedure as submitted by Mr. Harinath, the teamed Standing Counsel for the Kakatiya University is that the State Council of Higher Education has appointed the Convenor from among the professors of the Osmania University for the conduct of Entrance Test for the MBA for the Academic year 1997-98. The Convenor on the merits of the Entrance test, issues rank cards to the students; thereafter, the various Universities in the State issue respective notifications and call for the applications...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD700; 1998(6)ALT722
1. This appeal by the legal representatives of the deceased-plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.09.1992 passed in A.S. No.7 of 1988 on the file of the Sub-Court, Kadiri, reversing the Judgment and decree dated 15.03.1988 passed in O.S. No.518 of 1983 on the file of the principal District Munsif, Kadiri, in Anantapur District.2. The parties are being referred as they are arrayed in the suit for the sake of convenience.3. The plaintiff Dadireddi Chinna Gangi Reddy filed the said suit O.S. No.518 of 1983 for declaration of his title and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property or in the alternative for recovery of possession of the suit property. The suit property consists of five cents of open land in survey number 114 situated in Gopepalle village within specific boundaries. The case of the plaintiff is that he purchased the suitland from one Penujuri Rama...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALT155
ORDERKrishna Saran Shrivastav, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirupati, in O.P. No. 263/1988, dated 30-4-1992 whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,42,000/- with interest.2. It is no longer in dispute before me that on 30-4-1988 at about 8 a.m., when the son of the respondents was going on his cycle, the Driver of the lorry bearing No. AAK 1810 dashed his cycle near Jyothi Talkies due to which the deceased received severe injuries and died instantaneously.3. The Tribunal on assessment of the evidence on record, found the annual dependency at Rs. 6,000/- and considering the age of the deceased to be 22 years, applied the multiplier of 20 and found that the respondents were entitled to compensation of Rs. 1,20,000/- in addition to Rs. 20,000/- under the heads' pain and suffering' and loss of estate as also Rs. 2,000/- under the head of funeral expenses. Thus, it assessed the total compensation at Rs. 1,42,000...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(2)ALT(Cri)50; 1999CriLJ1219
ORDERBilal Nazki, J. 1. A complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act r/w Section 420 IPC is pending against the petitioner before the learned Additional District Munsif Magistrate, Kandukur. The complaint is sought to be quashed on various grounds, some of them refer to the factual aspects of the matter which this Court will not entertain under the provisions of Section 482, Cr.P.C. However, two legal grounds have been taken which will be considered by this Court presently.2. One of the grounds taken is that the complaint has been filed beyond time. I have gone through the complaint. The cheque was allegedly issued on 6th March, 1998, it was presented to the banker within six months and it was returned on 9-3-1998 with the endorsement that the accused had closed his account as early as on 4-9-1997. Notice was issued to the accused on 26th March, 1998 for making the payment. Payment was not made and the complaint was made on 8th May, 1998. Since the notice was given on 26...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD257; 1998(5)ALT743
ORDERMOTILAL B. NAIK, J 1. This writ petition is filed praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to complaint No. 101 of 1995 on the file of the first respondent and to set aside the order dated 4-7-1995 passed therein as illegal, void and contrary to Rule 5(6) of Andhra Pradesh Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayukta Investigation Rules, 1984 and consequently a direction is sought to the first respondent to proceed with the enquiry/investigation into the said complaint No.101 of 1995 against respondents 2 to 5 herein.2. Petitioner M. Girish Reddy, claiming himself to be a public spirited man has made a complaint against respondents 2 to 5 beforethe first respondent under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayukta Act, 1983 (for short 'the Act') alleging that respondents 2 to 5 are misusing the public funds earmarked for the actual beneficiaries. According to the petitioner in Medak District Scheduled Caste Society Services Limited, as agains...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1999(1)ALD1; 1998(6)ALT793
ORDERUmesh Chandra Banerjee, C.J. 1. In the present day judicial system, publicinterest Litigation is a significant step. On the wake of twenty first century, a rigid insistence on the strict rules pertaining to the concept of focus standi cannot be had, moreso, by reason of the changing structure of the society. Law-Courts exist for the society and in the event Law-Courts fall short of the expectation of the people, the Law-Courts would be losing their efficacy resulting in a total failure of the constitutional machinery. Judiciary has a pivotal role to play and in the event the justice administration system fails, the democratic polity, as enshrined in the Constitution would also come to an end and the resultant effect would be a social catastrophe.2. The concept of locus standi however through the years has had a steady refinement by the Law-Courts and this concept provided the Law-Courts with much greater responsibility for rendering the justice administration system available to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD111; 1998(6)ALT606
ORDER1. Rule nisi. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue took notice for the respondents. The Writ Petition was heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for both the parties.2. This is one of the cases which are quite often filed before this Court seeking essentially declaration of title to properties and for injunction against the public authorities. The petitioners and his father claim to have purchased the lands in Sy.No.354/2, 354/3 and 354/1 admeasuring Ac.4.97, Ac.4.97, Ac 0.97 and Ac. 3.59 respectively situated at Arooru Village Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District by registered sale deeds dated 2-11 -1981. The petitioner has sought for a writ or orter or direction, preferably one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in depriving the petitioner of his above agricultural lands as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(6)ALD274; [2001]103CompCas184(AP)
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Company Petition No.27 of 1993 dated 25-4-1996 whereby the resolution of the Board of Directors of the appellant-Company dated 15-5-1992 to increase the authorised capital of the Company and approval of the said resolution of the share holders in the extraordinary general meeting held on 15-6-1992 are set aside and the issue of capital to 50,000shares have been restored as also respondents 2 to 4 have been declared to be the majority share holders in the Company.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in brief are that; respondents No.2 to 4 had 49993 shares in the appellant-Company out of the authorised capital of 50,000 shares of Rs.10/- each while the remaining shares were held by seven individuals of one each. The Board of Directors Wallace Ltd (for short 'M/s SWC Ltd') on 15-5-1992 passed a resolution to increase authorised capital of the Company from Rs.5 lacs to Rs.25...
Tag this Judgment!