Andhra Pradesh Court January 2001 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.
R.K. Behra Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD521; 2001(1)ALT449
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, at Hyderabad, (for short 'the Tribunal'), dated 26-11-1999 in OA No.963 of 1998 dismissing the Original Application filed by the petitioner herein.2. The precise question that arises for our consideration and decision in this writ petition is whether a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste community who seeks appointment to the post of Foreman (GYRO) by way of promotion can claim as a matter of right or as a matter of course that the appointing authority should make good the deficit percentage of marks in the Departmental Qualifying Examination (DQE) by granting relaxation and adding requisite number of grace marks by virtue of the Administrative Instructions contained in GI Department of Per and A.R., O.M. No.36011/6/79-Est. (SCT), dated 19-4-1979.3. Before dealing with this precise question, the relevant background facts that led to the filing of this writ ...
Appari Satyanarayana Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation Dept. and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALT178
Satya Brata Sinha, C.J.1. The sole question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether imposition of penal rent upon the petitioner for not vacating the quarter allotted to him is legal.2. The petitioner was posted at Rajam as Head Draftsman Grade II and was allotted a Government B-2 quarter. He occupied the said quarter from 14-7-1986. The rent for the said quarter was fixed at Rs. 280/- p.m. He was not paid any house rent allowance. He was transferred to Parvathipuram and the said order of transfer was the subject matter of an application before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. An order of status quo was passed but allegedly it was not implemented and he was finally relieved on 27-6-1993.3. For alleged occupation of the said quarter illegally a penal rent of Rs. 1,590/-p.m. was imposed upon him. The petitioner approached the Lok Ayukta who had asked him to vacate the quarter but he did not do so. According to the petitioner as he had not been pai...
M. Balakrishna Rao Vs. Joint Collector and Addl. Magistrate, Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD66; 2001(2)ALT33
ORDER1. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the Proceedings No.D5/5345 of 1989 dated 29-5-1990 of the Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Hyderabad District and to quash the same.2. The respondent by the said order dated 29-5-1990 cancelled the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Secunderabad in Ref.No.A6/204/80 dated 1-1-1980 declaring that the petitioner is not a 'Mannevarulu' (Scheduled Tribe) Caste.3. The petitioner submits that he was born in Kondamadugu village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District. He belongs to 'Mannevarlu' caste and he had studied upto V Standard at Bhongir and V and VI standard at Bibinagar and again VII to XI standard at Bhongir. He stated that as his father expired in 1960, he had to migrate to Hyderababd to eakout his livelihood. He got appointed as Driver in Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) in the year 1980 on the basis of the caste certificate produced ...
Harishchandra Vidyarthi Vs. Meenakshi Shah and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD95; 2001(2)ALT206
ORDER1. In this revision under Section 22 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), the tenant is the petitioner. The learned I Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, as well as the learned Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court-appellate authority), agreed with the contention of the landlord's (respondent) and ordered eviction. Therefore, the tenant filed the revision assailing the illegality of the eviction order in RC No.708 of 1997 dated 25-6-1999, as confirmed by the appellate authority by order dated 23-2-2000 in RA No.223 of 1999. 2. The parties are referred by their status in the rent control case. Petitioner No.l is the mother. Petitioner No.2 is the son and petitioner No.3 is the daughter. They filed a petition for eviction of the tenant (respondent) under Section 10(3)(a)(i)(a) and under Section 12 of the Act. Their case is that the respondent is a tenant in mulgi 5-1-750/2, situated at HaridasMarket, Sultan Bazar, Hyder...
S. Venkata Rao Vs. A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD187; 2001(2)ALT280
ORDERSatyabrata Sinha, CJ1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 26-10-1999 passed in Rev. MA No.746 of 1996 arising out of OA No.3315 of 1989 whereby an whereunder the Tribunal refused to review its order stating:'On perusal of the judgment in OA No.3315 of 1989, it is evident that the Tribunal allowed the OA only on the ground that the applicant is a senior and his probation was also declared and his services were also regularised. Hence, it is felt that there is no justifying grounds to revert the applicant. The aspect of G.O. Ms. No.703, dated 28-11-1984 was not taken into consideration by this Tribunal while rendering the judgment, the applicant is expected to file an appeal, but he cannot agitate this aspect by filing this review, The scope of review is limited to the extent of clerical mistakes and other minor aspects.'2. The scope of review as sought to be propounded by the learned Tribunal, in our opinion, does not conform to the settled legal principles. The ...
Mogulla Ailamma and Others Vs. Samba Yellaiah and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD606; 2001(2)ALT445
ORDER1. The defendants in OS No.119 of 1996 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Warangal, are the petitioners. The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. Their plaint case is that they purchased the suit schedule property jointly which was subsequently partitioned between plaintiff and others. The defendants claiming title to the land are trying to interfere with the plaintiffs' enjoyment.2. The defendants filed an application under Order VI, Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' for brevity) seeking a direction from the trial Court to the plaintiffs to furnish particulars as to (i) when the division took place between the plaintiffs and Sailu; (ii) who was the scribe and elders for the division of the lands; (iii) the date, month and year of alleged joint purchase and (iv) the names of scribes and attesters and payment of consideration amount. The application being IA No.265 of 1997 w...
Avon Industries Ltd. Vs. Integrated Finance Company Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD(Cri)461; 2001(1)ALT(Cri)331; 2002CriLJ4592
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The petitioners seek to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('the Code' for brevity) for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against them by the first respondent herein.2. Although some of the parties are different and some are same, as common questions of law an; involved all these petitions can be disposed of together.Criminal Petition Nos. 4432 to 4439 of 1999 :3. The factual matrix, which is germane, for effective adjudication of the matter, may be set forth thus :The first petitioner-M/s. Avon Industries Limited is a company duly incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. The second petitioner is its Managing Director, the third petitioner is its Joint Director, and the fourth petitioner is its Executive Director. The first respondent is also a company duly incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. The first respondent-company has been carrying on business as ...
S. Venkata Ramanamma Vs. Principal Secretary to Govt., Forest Dept., A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALT273
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. This application is directed a Judgment dated 25.1.2000 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad whereby and whereunder the Original Application filed by the petitioner herein questioning the proceedings Rc. No. 4521/98/H.4 dated 30.10.1999 was dismissed. 2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe. So are the other concerned candidates viz., Smt. Savithri Devi and Smt. Sugali Siva Bai. According to the petitioner she fulfils all the conditions laid down by the Government for limited recruitment to fill up back log vacancies of SC and ST as per G.O. Ms. No. 238 issued by the GAD dated 26.5.1999 and G.O. Ms. No. 71 Finance Department dated 26.5.1999. Her name was also sponsored by the Employment Exchange. She and other candidates were interviewed where after she was appointed as an attender with effect from 29.6.1999 by the 4th respondent. She reported for duty on the same date. It appears that the 4th resp...
V. Bala Krishna Rao Vs. Joint Collector
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: AIR2001AP158
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the Proceedings No.D5/5345/89 dated 29/05/1990 of the Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Hyderabad District and to quash the same.2. The respondent by the said order dated 29/05/1990 cancelled the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Secunderbad in Ref.No.A6/204/80 dated 01/01/1980 declaring that the petitioner is not a 'Mannevarulu' (Scheduled Tribe) Caste.3. The petitioner submits that he was born in Kondamadugu village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda District. He belongs to 'Mannevarulu' caste and he had studied upto V Standard at Bhongir and V and VI standard at Bibinagar and again VII to XI standard at Bhongir. He stated that as his father expired in 1960, he had to migrate to Hyderabad to eakout his livelihood. He got appointed as Driver in Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) in the year 1980 on the basis of the caste certifi...
Gudavalli Murali Krishna and ors. Vs. Gudavalli Madhavi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD(Cri)689; 2001(1)ALT(Cri)433; 2001(2)LS39
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. At the threshold in all these petitions the question germane for consideration, upon which the very maintainability of these petitions hinges, is as to whether the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction can quash a First Information Report pending investigation.2. The objection at the initial stage about the maintainability of these petitions filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('the Cr.P.C.' for brevity) invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court to quash the relevant First Information Reports issued against the petitioners while registering the cases against them, has arisen in view of three Judgments of this court. The earliest on the point is in HASAN ALI KHAN v. STATE OF A.P.1 rendered by a learned single Judge. The second one is in S.SARAT BABU CHOWDARY v. INSPECTOR OF POLICE2 rendered by a Bench and the last one is the latest Judgment of this court in PEARL BEVERAGES LIMITED, NEW DELHI V. STATE OF A.P.3 rendered by a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »