Andhra Pradesh Court August 2000 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.
Road Transport Corporation Workers Union Vs. Apsrtc, Hyd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(5)ALD614; 2000(6)ALT696; [2000(87)FLR698]
ORDER1. Heard both the Counsel. With their consent, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.2. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to issue day-to-day circulars on payment of usual charges and also to provide the bus pass warrant to the petitioner on par with other trade unions.3. Admittedly the petitioner's union is a registered union. Therefore, the General Secretary of the petitioners' union in my considered opinion is entitled for day-to-day circulars issued by the respondent-Corporation on payment of usual charges. Moreover the circulars issued by the Corporation are public documents and every citizen, particularly the leader of a trade union has a right of access to those documents. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Corporation that the petitioners' union is a minority union and hence it is not entitled for the said circulars. This contention cannot be accepted for the reason that no discrimination can be s...
Sree Seetha Rama Upper Primary School, Matwada, Warrangal Vs. Commissi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)ALD11; 2000(5)ALT532
ORDER1. The question that falls for consideration in this writ petition is in a narrow compass i.e., whether the management is entitled to claim reimbursement of the salaries that were paid to the teachers for the period from 1-9-1994 to 26-12-1996 i.e., from the date of admitting the school to grant-in-aid to the date on which the services of the teachers working in un-aided posts were ultimately regularised by the Government.2. Since 1982 the petitioner's school started functioning and running class in Telugu and English mediums. As per the grant-in-aid rules, the school became eligible to be admitted to grant-in-aid according to Act No.22 of 1988. On an application filed by the Correspondent seeking admission of the school to grant-in-aid, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No.365, Education, (PS-2), dated 10-10-1994. In this G.O., several school including the petitioner's school were admitted to grant-in-aid. At S.No.13 in Annexure-I of the said G.O. four posts were admitted to grant-i...
Pindiganti Lakshminarayana (Deceased) by His Lrs. Vs. Pindiganti Venka ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)ALD157; 2000(6)ALT295
1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment rendered by the I Additional District Judge, KrishnaDistrict at Machilipatnam, dated 12-10-1987 in AS No.69 of 1981 under which the judgment and decree of the Court of the Principal District Munsif, Avanigadda, dated 31-3-1981 passed in OS No.107 of 1978 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for declaration of title and possession has been confirmed.2. The appellant herein is defendant No.3, who died during pendency of the appeal and appellants 2 to 4 have been brought on record as his legal representatives. Respondent No.1 herein is the plaintiff, respondent No.2 herein is defendant No.4 and respondent No.3 herein is defendant No.2 in the suit. The first appellant in AS No.69 of 1981 on the file of the I Additional District Court, who was defendant No.1 in the suit, has not been impleaded in this appeal stating that he was not a necessary party. The plaintiff filed the suit for declarafion and possession of the plaint schedule prope...
Dr. R. Janardhana Rao and Others Vs. A.P. Dairy Development Co-operati ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)ALD321; [2001(88)FLR74]
ORDER1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the prescription of cut-off date viz., 19-11-1991 and limit the eligibility to the payment of gratuity prescribed in the Group Gratuity Scheme to employees retiring on or after the said date in the orders of the respondent Federation in circular letter No.2779/GGS/ 90 dated 24-2-1992 as void, without jurisdiction, illegal and arbitrary; and consequently direct the respondent to extend the uniform gratuity facility based on the formula applied to the Group Gratuity Scheme introduced through Life Insurance Corporation of India without limiting the eligibility to employees of the respondent retiring on or after 19-11-1991 and pay the difference of the amount to the petitioners and pass such other order or orders.2. The brief facts as stated by the petitioners are that the petitioners No.1 to 5, who are the employees of the State Government viz., Animal Husbandry Department, were transferred to the Andhra Pradesh Dai...
Union of India and Another Vs. Mohammed MohiuddIn and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)ALD376; 2000(6)ALT551
ORDERN.Y. Hanumathappa, J.1. Since the question involved in all the above writ appeals are common, they are clubbed together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. All the writ appeals are filed challenging the order of the learned single Judge of this Court in WP No. 10804 of 1996, dated 14-11-1997 allowing the writ petition.3. WP No. 10804 of 1996 was filed by 62 petitioners who were shown as respondent Nos. 1 to 62 in all the writ appeals seeking for the relief of writ of mandamus directing the Executive Officer, Secunderabad Cantonment, A.P. Circle, Secunderabad to issue sanction of lay out plan applied for by the writ petitioners in respect of Ac.8.00 ofland in S.No.170 (part) of Tokatta village, Secunderabad Mandal and in conformity with the orders passed by this Court in WPNo.4250 of 1994 dated 30-9-1994 and WPNo.6012 of 1995, dated 6-12-1995. The Defence Estate Officer, A.P. Circle, Secunderabad; the Director of Defence Estate, Southern Command, Pune; Syed Sadiq Ali Khan; M...
Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs. MedwIn Educational Society
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: (2001)3UPLBEC2669
M.S. Liberhan, C.J.1. In these appeals the common questions of fact and law have been raised.2. The State having decided locations for establishment of Medical Colleges and Dental Colleges, constituted a committee headed by a sitting Judge of this Court with the other members i.e., the Director of Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences and the Vice-Chancellor of NTR University of Health Sciences. The Committee was required to examine the applications in detail in accordance with the procedure provided and required to be followed.3. The learned Single Judge found that the function of the Committee is part of quasi-judicial or executive functions of the State. The High Court Judge ought not to associate and function as head of such Committee in view of the doctrine of separation of powers enshrined in Article 50 and further that it is not desirable for a sitting Judge to take part in the process of recommending eligible applicants for grant of essentiality certificate. Participation of th...
Ankinapalli Obul Reddy Vs. Dadibathina China Gurava Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-11-2000
Reported in: 2000(5)ALT125
ORDERG. Bikshapathy, J.1. The CR.P. is filed against the order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kavali in I.A. No. 45 of 2000 in O.S. No, 2 of 2000.2. The petitioner is the defendant. Respondent No. 1-plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of certain sums from the petitioner herein in O.S. No. 2 of 2000. Pending suit, he filed I.A. No. 45 of 2000 under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking attachment before Judgment. The said application, after hearing the parties was allowed by an order dated 17-4-2000 against the said order, the present Revision has been filed.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the lower Court failed to observe the mandatory provisions contained in Order XXXVIII of C.P.C.; as such the order passed by the lower Court is wholly erroneous and contrary to law. The learned Counsel further submits that the suit itself is not maintainable in view of the averments made in the written statement but even otherwise the lower Court...
V. Sarojanamma Vs. Deputy Executive Engineer, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(5)ALD615; 2000(5)ALT377
ORDER1.The petitioner is a resident of Parvathapur village. She is aggrieved by the action of the respondents namely, Deputy Executive Engineer, Rural Water Scheme, Gram Panchayat of Parvathapur and Revenue Divisional Officer, Wanaparthy and Mandal Revenue Officer, Ghanpurin drilling a bore well in the land comprised in Sy.No.308 of Parvathapur village allegedly belonging to her family. She prayed for a declaration that such action of the respondents is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. She also prays for a consequential direction to the respondents restraining them 'from ever using the said bore well'.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 25-4-2000. On that day, this Court also directed the Gram Panchayat not to put the bore well sunk in Sy.No.308 into operation by drawing water. The second respondent-Gram Panchayat filed an application being WVMP No. 1270 of 2000 praying to vacate the interim orders granted on 25-4-2000. When this application was taken up for consid...
Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University Labour Union Rep. by Its Pr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(5)ALT576
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The first respondent by proceedings No.A1/1570/95 dated 30-6-2000 communicated the final seniority list of casual labourers working in the Agricultural Research Station and Colleges in Zone-III. One T.Nageswara Rao (hereafter referred as 'casual employee') working at Cotton Research Station, Amaravathi, was placed at Serial No.30 in the seniority list and the relevant entry in the seniority list shows that he was appointed on 1-4-1990. The petitioner, which is a registered labour union, complains that the casual employee has in fact joined the service on 1-1-1975 and therefore, he ought to have been placed at Serial No.1. The petitioner union approached this Court praying to declare the seniority list placing the casual employee at Serial No.30 instead of Serial No.1 as illegal, unjust and contrary to law.2. By the impugned seniority list, the University authorities decided the seniority of 67 casual labourers, who are the members of the petitioner union. Every em...
D. Dastagiramma Vs. District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-09-2000
Reported in: 2000(6)ALD63; 2000(5)ALT560
ORDER1.The petitioner claims to be the owner of land is Survey Nos.16/1 A, 167 1B, 16/1C, 18/1A, 18/1B and 184 in Gundreddipalli village, Kamarole Mandal, Prakasam district, admeasuring about two acres. On the northern side and eastern side of the petitioner's land, there are two small streams Kocheruvu Vagu, and, Otigundam Vagu, When respondents 1 to 3 allegedly granted permission to fourth respondent for construction of a check dam near Survey No.18/1B at Kocheruvu vagu as part of Janma Bhoomi Padakam, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. He prays for a declaration that action of respondents 1 to 3 in permitting the construction of the check dam by the 4th respondent is illegal and violates the principles of natural justice.2. This Court ordered notice before admission on 28-9-1999 and when the matter was called on 3-12-1999, also ordered status quo existing as on that date. The respondents 1 to 3 have come forward with a counter-affidavit by way ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »