Andhra Pradesh Court June 1999 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.
Sub-collector, L.A.O. Vs. Koppisetti Appala Narasomma
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-1999
Reported in: AIR2000AP223; 1999(6)ALT461
N.Y. Hanumanthappa, J.1. These appeals filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act came up for hearing before the Division Bench consisting of their Lordships Honlale Sri Justice P. Venkatarama Reddy and Hon'ble Sri Justice B.V. Ranga Raju of this Court. After hearing both sides and going through various issues Involved in the appeals and conflicting views given by this Court (separate Benches) on the similar issues, the learned Judges felt that some of the unanswered questions on several aspects coming up every day in the appeals filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act require to be dealt and an authoritiative pronouncement to be rendered by a Full Bench of this Court. Accordingly these appeals have been referred to the Full Bench.2. Before answering the reference, we would like to set out a few facts which are involved in these appeals as follows :-- An extent of Ac. 9.42 cents of dry land situated in NTC Nos. 369 to 372 of Mogalrajapuram, revenue manda of Vijayawad...
M.S. Rukmini Vs. District Collector (Pts), Chittor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD99; 1999(4)ALT80
ORDER1. Questioning the notification in Roc.No. 78/98-A4(Pts), dated 4-6-1999 issued by the District Collector(Pts), Chittoor, who is the respondent herein, removing the petitioner from the Office of the Sarpanch, Pakala Gram Panchayat, the present writ petition is filed.2. I have gone through the order passed by the respondent removing the petitioner from the Office of the Sarpanch. It is not in dispute that the District Collector is exercising quasi judicial functions under Section 249(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act (for short 'the Act') and he has to pass orders on the information furnished by the Department with reference to the explanation offered by the delinquent, if necessary by giving an opportunity to the effected party to prove his case in person. But, admittedly, in this case, the District Collector called for the report of the Divisional Panchayat Officer and passed the orders on the basis of the findings arrived at by the Divisional Panchayat Officer. It is pe...
Bhimeswara Swami Temple, Bheemavaram, W.G. Dist. Vs. M. Chalapathi Rao ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD201
ORDERM.S. Liberhan, C.J.1. The appeal is filed by the Executive Officer, Sri Bhuneswara Swami Temple, Bhimavaram, W.G. District, the 2nd respondent in WPNo.10119 of 1998, aggrieved by the judgment dated 22-4-1998 allowing the said writ petition invalidating the show-cause notice dated 16-12-1997 issued by the 2nd respondent herein (1st respondent in the WP).The factual scenario leading to the appeal on hand :2. The parties are referred to as arrayed in the writ appeal :(a) The 1st respondent herein was declared as the highest bidder in the auction conducted for lease of the lands belonging to the Appellant-Temple, for the years 1970-80 to 1984-85. Thereafter, the 1st respondent made an application to the Temple that he would enhance the maktha (lease amount) and requested that the lease be extended for a further period of three years from 1995-96 upto 1997-98, consequent upon which and pursuant to the recommendations of the appellant, the Commissioner of Endowments, extended the lease ...
Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD209; 1999(4)ALT489
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. This writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 20-2-1998 in WP No.29904 of1995. In fact, in the order dated 20-2-1998, the learned single Judge passed an order refusing to review the earlier order passed in the same writ petition on 3-12-1996 when a mandamus was issued to third appellant herein to include the respondent in the list of successful candidates and directing the first appellant to make suitable appointment to the petitioner in accordance with her qualifications.2. The parties are referred to in this judgment as they were arrayed in the writ petition.3. The petitioner in her affidavit filed in support of the writ petition stated that she is a post-graduate in Science from Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupathi and that later she acquired M. Tech., from IIT Delhi. Pursuant to a notification issued by the 3rd respondent namely the Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board, Krishi Anusandhana Bhavan, New Delhi, she applied fo...
Sri Bhimeswara Swami Temple, Rep. by Executive Officer Vs. M. Chalapat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALT391
M.S. Liberhan, C.J.1. The appeal is filed by the Executive Officer, Sri Bhimeswara Swami Temple, Bhimavaram, W.G. District, the 2nd respondent in W.P. No. l0119 of 1998, aggrieved by the judgment dated 22-4-1998 allowing the said writ petition invalidating the show-cause notice dated 16-12-1997 issued by the 2nd respondent herein (1st respondent in the W.P.).The factual scenario leading to the appeal on hand:-2. The parties are referred to as arrayed in the Writ Appeal.(a) The 1st respondent herein was declared as the highest bidder in the auction conducted for lease of the lands belonging to the Appellant-Temple, for the years 1970-80 to 1984-85. Thereafter, the 1st respondent made an application to the Temple that he would enhance the maktha (lease amount) and requested that the lease be extended for a further period of three years from 1995-96 upto 1997-98, consequent upon which and pursuant to the recommendations of the appellant, the Commissioner of Endowments, extended the lease ...
Pantyala Eswara Babu Vs. State
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)ALD675; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)13; 1999(2)ALT(Cri)162
ORDER1. Heard both sides.2. The petitioner herein was summoned as a witness in SC No.82 of 1994 on the file of I Add 1.Sessions Judge, Guntur. It appears that on one of the dates of hearing i.e., from 8-6-99 when he was to appear in the Court for recording his evidence in pursuance of the summons received by him, he failed to appear in the Court. On that, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge ordered N.B.W. to be issued which was duly executed and the petitioner was produced in the Court and was remanded to judicial custody. Subsequently on 23-6-99 he moved an application for bail which was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. It is under these circumstances, the present petition for bail has been filed in this Court.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner gave a reason for his non-appearance in the Court on the date of hearing, namely, that he was sick and was unable to travel to the Court. Even assuming that on the failure of the' petitioner to appear i...
Jainco Package Industries Vs. Commercial of Industries, A.P., Hyderaba ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)ALD724; 1999(4)ALT45
ORDER1. The petitioner is an Industrial unit and in this wril petition it has sought for Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 1 and 2 in not releasing the investment subsidy of Rs.4,12,020/- to the petitioner's unit as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and for a consequential direction to the Respondents 1 and 2 to release the investment subsidy amount of Rs.4,12,020/ - with interest at 16.5% from the date of sanction of subsidy i.e., 28-2-1997 till the date of payment.2. Let the Court state the undisputed facts that lead to the filing of this Writ Petition in brief as under:The petitioner's unit was constructed on 3-12-1994; the unit was registered with the Industries department on 21-1-1995; the plan was approved by the Director of Factories on 18-5-1995; Clearance from the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board was obtained on 20-5-1995; change of the use of the land from agriculture to industry purpose was ordered by the District Collector on 17-6-1995; th...
Madan Gopal Badari Narayana Firm Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Civil Suppl ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD221
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed for issue of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order passed bythe Joint Collector, East Godavari District, 2nd Respondent herein, in V.10/1633/84 dated 16-2-1984 and confirmed by the Additional Commissioner of Civil Supplies and Ex-Officio Secretary to Government, 1st Respondent herein, in G.O. Ms. No.589, Food & Agriculture (CS.I) Department, dated 10-4-1992 and quashing the same.2. The petitioner-Firm is a licensed foodgrain dealer doing wholesale and retail business in food-grains, edible oil seeds and edible oils. On 1-2-1984 the A.G.P.O., Kakinada along with his staff conducted a surprise check on its business premises. During that surprise inspection it was found that the petitioner was not maintaining any stock register for the stocks being dealt with by it and also did not exhibit price-cum-stock board and thereby contravened the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licensing and Distribution) Order, 19...
Fishermen Co-operative Society Ltd., Kothapeta Vs. District Collector, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD270
ORDER1. The petitioner is a Cooperative Society. It is a functional society formed by 50 fishermen on 27-5-1985 who belong to Kothapet Mandal. The society has its operations in five villages namely Kothapet, Mandapally, Billakarru, Modekurru and Kondalapally. They filed this writ petition for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent Gram Panchayat represented by its Executive Officer in auctioning the fishing rights of Lingala Cheruvu of Kothapet village as being illegal and unconstitutional. The 3rd respondent in the auction conducted on 9-7-1988 leased out Lingala Cheruvu ad-measuring 3-00 acres to the 4th respondent. The grievance of the petitioner society is that the 3rd respondent is not competent to lease out the fishing rights of the said tank to the 4th respondent ignoring the claims of Fishermen Cooperative Society.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 14-9-1998. Notices were served and the 3rd and 4th respondents have filed counter-affidavits. ...
Mohammed Ibrahim Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Police, Administration-cum ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)ALD103
ORDER1. Petitioner herein was admittedly allotted the premises in question by order dated 21st March, 1969 vide proceedings No.BB/56-35-59-2 by the Commissioner of Police. The said order is as follows:'An old outpost building known as 'Chariest Street Outpost' bearing MCH No.9-3-72/73 situated near Gopalapuram Police Station, Secunderabad, is allotted temporarily with effect form 15-3-1969 to Sri Mohd. Ibrahim, PC No.3705 of Gopalapuram Police Station for his personal occupation at his own risk subject to the conditions that he will vacate the said outpost building on 15 days' notice whenever the Department requires the building, that he will not be entitled to any regular quarter when he is asked to vacate the said outpost building, that he will not make any additions or alterations to the said outpost building without prior permission and if he does so he will be liable to disciplinary action. The HRA should be disallowed from the allottee's pay with effect from 15-3-1969. Sd/- M. Ve...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »