Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
M. Ashok Goud Vs. the Collector and Dist. Magistrate and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT72
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. This Writ petition has been filed by M. Ashok Goud challenging the order of detention passed by the respondents against his father namely M. Anja Goud (hereinafter referred to as 'detenu').2. The order of detention has been passed on 24-9-2001 by Collector and District Magistrate, Nizamabad in terms of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot leggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act,1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Notices have been issued. Counter and an additional counter affidavit have been filed. We have heard the learned Senior counsel Mr. C. Padmanabha Reddy for petitioner and also the learned Advocate General for the State.3. The impugned order was passed on 24th September,2001. The petitioner made a representation on 28th September,2001. The order of detention was approved by the Government on 1st October,2001. The representation made to the Collector was rejected on 5-10-2...
Kuruva Surya Prakash Reddy Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD(Cri)341; 2002(1)ALT(Cri)384; 2002CriLJ2356
ORDERE. Dharma Rao, J.1. This Criminal Revision arises out of an order in Cri A No. 173/96, dated 4-6-1999 on the file of the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool, confirming the conviction and sentence inflicted by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class. Banaganpalle, in C.C. No. 192/95 dated 10-10-1996 wherein A1 was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 25(1B)(a) of Arms Act and is sentenced is to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the said offence.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contenced that under Section 37(b) of the Arms Act (for brevity the Act) the accused was arrested on 15-3-1994. According to the prosecution one country made SBL gun was seized from the possession of accused on 14-3-1994 but he was not produced. As per the Judgment of the Sessions Court he was arrested on 14-3-1994 and the weapon was seized. On 14-3-1994, the gun was not produced along with the accused but the SBL gun was received in the Court on...
Indian Railway Construction Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. S. Govindaiah and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD770; 2002(1)ALT1
V.V.S. Rao, J. 1. These two writ appeals are filed by Indian Railway Construction Company Limited and others against the orders of the learned Single Judge. This common order shall dispose of both the writ appeals. The parties shall be referred to by their status in the writ petitions. 2. WP No. 9107 of 1999 was filed by two workmen praying this Court to declare the proceedings dated 15-1-1999 issued by the third respondent as arbitrary and illegal. A consequential direction was also sought directing the respondents 1 to 3 to continue the petitioners in service or in the alternative to appoint them before appointing any other candidates. The petitioner in WP No. 12567 of 2000 prayed for a declaration that the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of Voluntary Resignation Scheme (VRS) as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction to the respondents to settle the claim of the petitioner as per VRS scheme as agreed to by the res...
Manyam Lakshmikantham and ors. Vs. Runkana Balaji
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD386
ORDER1. The petitioners obtained an order of eviction in RCC No. 22 of 1996 on the fife of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller, Vizianagaram. The respondent-tenant filed an appeal under Section 20 of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for brevity 'the Act'). In the application being IA No. 1150 of 1990, seeking stay, filed by the respondent-tenant, the appellate Court granted stay subject to the condition of the respondent-tenant paying arrears of rent to the petitioners-landlords. The respondent-tenant, allegedly committed default in paying the arrears of rent, as directed by the appellate Court. Therefore, the petitioners-landlords filed execution petition being EP No. 112 of 2000, under Order 21, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for brevity 'the Code'), seeking direction to the respondent-tenant to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the schedule property under Section 15 of the Act. The learned Rent Controller...
Andhra Pradesh Housing Development and Finance Corporation Limited, Hy ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD721
G. Bikshapathy, J. 1. Both these writ petitions can be disposed of by common order.2. WP No.19065 of 1996 is filed challenging the notification issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.658 Revenue dated 9-8-1996 cancelling the order in G.O. Ms. No. 103 Revenue (LA) Department, dated 10-3-1995. Further, the petitioner is also challenging G.O. Ms. No.725 dated 16-12-1995 withdrawing G.O. Rt. No.1227 Revenue, dated 12-10-1995; G.O. Rt. No. 1444 Revenue, dated 22-11-1995 and G.O. Rt. No. 1445 dated 22-11-1995 and also memorandum No.26509/LAl/96-3 dated 12-8-1996 and for consequential reliefs. In WP No.22778 of 1996, the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the orders passed by this Court in WP No.17409 of 1989 and WP No.I6440 of 1995 dated 26-3-1996 by acquiring and delivering the possession of items 1, 2-A and 2-B of vacant land covered by Articles of Agreement dated 24-4-1995 by declaring the order in G.O. Ms. No.658 dated 9-8-1996 as illegal and...
Vivek Vardhini Education Society Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD323
S.R. Nayak, J.1. Both the writpetitions are directed against the order of the Government in G.O. Rt. No.699, Education (CE-II) Department, dated 22-6-1996.2. WP No, 12785 of 1996 is filed by the Management, while WP No. 15262 of 1996 is filed by the Charged Officer.3. The background facts leading to the filing of these writ petitions may briefly be noted as under:4. The Charged Officer was appointed as Lecturer in Commerce in V.V. Education Society on 12-9-1972. When he was serving as such, on 25-5-1985 he was transferred to V.V Day College from Evening College and he was relieved from the Evening College on 31-5-1985 and accordingly he reported to duty at the Day College. When he was serving as Lecturer in Day College, he absented himself with effect from 19-11-1985 and it appears that in the meanwhile, the Charged Officer filed WP No.2916 of 1986 assailing the Transfer Order dated 25-5-1985 transferring him from V.V. Evening College to V.V. Day College and that writ petition was dism...
Panchumarthi Anuradha Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD317; 2001(6)ALT610
ORDER1. The petitioner in the instant writ petition prays for issuance of a writ of Mandamus declaring G.O. Ms. No.273, M.A., Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Elc.II) Department, dated 8-5-2000 appointing Sri P. Rangaiah, retired District and Sessions Judge as the Election Tribunal for a period of one year and G.O. Ms, No. 151, M.A., Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Elec.II) Department, dated 21-4-2001 extending the term upto 31-12-2001 or till the necessity ceases, whichever is earlier, as illegal and void. The petitioner also prays for a consequential declaration declaring the judgment dated 26-7-2001 in Election Petition No. l of 2000 on the file of the Election Tribunal as illegal and void.2. Before adverting to the question as to the validity of the impugned Order issued by the State Government appointing the second respondent herein as the Election Tribunal, it is necessary to notice the relevant facts leading to filing of this writ petition.3. The G...
Panchumarthi Anuradha Vs. Avala Nagarani and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD521; 2001(6)ALT692
ORDER1. The petitioner in the instant writ petition prays for issuance of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the judgment dated 26-7-2001 in Election Petition No.l of 2001 on the file of the Election Tribunal for Municipal Corporations at Hyderabad and quash the same. 2. Before adverting to the question as to whether the order passed by the Election Tribunal for Municipal Corporations at Hyderabad constituted under Section 75(1) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short 'the Election Tribunal') suffers from any error apparent on the face of the record, it may be necessary to briefly notice the relevant facts leading to filing of this writ petition. 3. The elections for the office of Mayor, Vijayawada Municipal Corporation and Corporators for 50 Divisions were held on 9-3-2000. In the said elections, the petitioner and respondents 1 to 7 herein have contested the election for the office of the Mayor. The petitioner herein secured 1,05,169 votes, w...
Rayala Umamaheswara Rao Vs. Dantuluri Narasimha Murthy Raju
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: AIR2002AP178
ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. On an application filed in a suit the trial Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence of an Expert on Commission, against which this revision petition has been filed.2. Prima facie this Court finds that the endorsement made by Sri D.D. Goel, Government Examiner on his letter bearing No. BH-55/2001/2314, Dt.22-6-2001 accompanying his opinion, is contemptuous. In his endorsement at para No. 3 of the letter addressed to the I-Addl. Junior Civil Judge. Vijayawada, Sri D.D.Goel, Government Examiner stated that, should evidence be necessary in this case, the opinion. No, or this letter reference be quoted in all correspondence and it may be recorded on Commission at Hyderabad..... 'This Court findsthat it is not the choice of a witness that his statement be recorded either on Commission or in the open Court. This appears prima facie to be interference in the discharge of judicial funticons of a subordinate Court. Let a ...
V. Anjaneyulu Vs. Govt.of A.P. and Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-2001
Reported in: 2001(6)ALT789
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Mr. P.V.S.S.S. Rama Rao, learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Mr. Ravinder, learned counsel representing Mr. C. Srinivas Baba, learned counsel for the contesting respondent No. 4.2. The Writ Petitioner filed the Writ Petition seeking a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the orders dated 26.11.2001 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 6554 of 2001 as illegal and arbitrary. By the said order, the learned Tribunal while dismissing the O.A. as devoid of merits vacated the interim order of status quo granted on 21.9.2001 and allowed VMA. Nos. 545 and 602 of 2001.3. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued orders in various G.Os for continuation of the election posts till 31.7.2001 in the Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment Department and no further orders were issued by the Government extending period of the said posts beyond 31.7.2001. Consequently, by Proceedings No. 18571/CPR & RE/A1/2001 dated 31.8.2001, the Commissione...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »