Andhra Pradesh Court April 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.
S.Y. Nawab Vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)ALD146; 2001(3)ALT619
ORDERS.B. Sinha, C.J. 1. The discretion exercised by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad in distributing its largesse to the 2nd respondent herein without issuing any advertisement therefor is in question in this writ appeal which is directed against a judgment dated 15-6-1995 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.22227 of 1994.2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The 1st respondent herein purported to be suffering from want of funds for the purpose of erection of arches and display of advertisements thereon issued a press note advertisement to the effect that there could be sponsorship by the companies and the costs for installation of the arches and sign boards as also their maintenance could be met thereby. The 2nd respondent allegedly made a survey in that regard at the request of the 1st respondent whereafter a project report was submitted. The 1st respondent thereafter allowed the 2nd respondent to put up certain arches in the twin ci...
Member-secretary, Punishing Authority, Apseb, Hyd. and Others Vs. G. A ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)ALT35
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ1. An order dated 18-12-2000 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in WP No.2682 of 1994 is in question in this appeal.2. The petitioner was appointed as Asst. Engineer (Electrical) in 1978. He was transferred and posted as Asst. Engineer, Maintenance in 1992 at Karimnagar. In September, 1998, the officials of Anti-Corruption Bureau of the State of Andhra Pradesh made search of Kakatiya Industrial Training Institute and pursuant to the report submitted by ACB, on It 11-1988, the petitioner was placed under suspension. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him in relation to the following charges:Charge No.1: Smt G. Kamamrutham, w/o. G Amruthaiah, Assistant Engineer/Maintenance/132 KV SS/Karimnagar has been the Secretary ofthe Managing Committee of the private Kakatiya Industrial Training Institute without the permission of A.P.S.E. Board. Charge No. 2: Sri G. Amruthaiah, Assistant Engineer, Maintenance, 132 KV SS, Karimnagar has been actively par...
Andhra Bank Scheduled Tribe Employees' Welfare Association Vs. Andhra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)ALD153; 2001(3)ALT349; (2002)1UPLBEC591
S.B. Sinha, CJ. 1. The question which has been referred to by a learned single Judge of this Court for consideration of this Full Bench is as follows:In case of promotion to the various posts, whether the State or the Union of India, as the case may be, is at liberty to have or not to have reservations in favour of SCs, STs and other BCs.2. The petitioner is an Association registered under the Societies Registration Act. The members of the Association are the employees of the first respondent Bank. The grievance of the petitioner is that promotion policy is going to be implemented without following the reservalion policy.3. It is not in dispute that the appointment to the post in Junior Management Grade Scale-I is filled up by direct recruitment whereafter promotion is granted to Middle Management Grade Scale II and Middle Management Grade Scale III and Senior Management Grade Scales IV and V. As regard the promotion by Selection method, para 9.2 of the Chapter 9 of Reservation Policy ...
Bharat Coca-cola Bottling South East Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Government of Andhr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD103
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. These two writ applications being inter related were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.In Writ Petition No.7640 of 1999, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus quashing the G.O.Rt.No.506 dated 23.3.1999 and G.O.Rt.No.507, dated 23.3.1999. In W.P. No. 13056 of 1999, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the provisions of Section 10-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 inserted by Amendment Act 32 of 1987 as unconstitutional.2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The petitioner which is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 entered into a Business Purchase Agreement with respondent No.6 whereby and whereunder it acquired the business undertaking of the respondent No.6 situated at Ramavarappadu, Vijayawada in terms whereof services of 78 permanent employees were taken over by the petitioner. The petitioner has set up a manufacturing unit at the village Atmakur, Vijayaw...
Shahid Khan Vs. Director of Revenue Intelligence
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(1)ALD(Cri)781; 2001CriLJ3183
Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 1684 of 2000 is filed by A-1. Criminal Appeal No. 1768 of 2000 is filed by A-2 and A-5. Criminal Appeal No. 1689 of 2000 is filed by A-3 and A-4 and Criminal Appeal No. 1683 of 2000 is filed by A-6.2. All the above appeals arise out of Sessions Case No. 164 of 1995 which was decided by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad and therefore they are disposed of by a common judgment.3. The accused-appellants herein were facing in all five charges. The first charge against A-3 to A-5 was under section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ( for brevity ' NDPS ACT'). It is alleged that they were in possession of Psychotropic Substance viz., Methaqualone Tablets. The second charge against A-2 to A-5 was under section 23 read with section 28 of NDPS Act. The allegation was that they attempted to export psychotropic substance from India to Nairobi, South Africa. The third charge against A-1 was under section 2 (viii) (a)...
Shakeel Akhtar Vs. State of A.P., Repted., by Public Prosecutor
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(2)ALD(Cri)1; 2001CriLJ3881
R. Ramanujam, J.1. Criminal Petition No. 710 of 2001 is filed by A.1 in Sessions Case No. 430 of 2000, pending on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, seeking to quash the proceedings in the said Sessions Case in so far as they relate to him. 2. In the said Sessions case, the petitioner and 8 others were charged for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 22, 25, 28 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the Act') on the basis of the Charge sheet filed by the Inspector of Police, Narcotic Cell, C.I.D., Hyderabad, in Crime No. 253 of 2000 of Bowenpally Police Station.3. Criminal Petition No. 1093 of 2001 is filed by A.1 and A.2 in the aforementioned Sessions Case seeking bail. Hence, they are being disposed of by this common order.4. The case of the prosecution, as set forth in the charge sheet, in brief, is that:5. A.1 and A.2 hail from Uttar Pradesh. A.2 is the follower of A.1. A.4 also hails from Uttar Pradesh and she is a clos...
Hemanth Fan Components Vs. Central Power Distribution Co. of A.P. Ltd. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: 2002(5)ALT201
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. Petitioner assails the proceedings dated 19-3-2001 determining that the petitioner's unit is liable to be assessed under the H.T. Service category.2. Petitioner claims to be a manufacturer of fan components. It is located in the premises of Plot No. 1, S.No. 308, I.D.A., Jeedimetla, Qutbullapur Municipality, Ranga Reddy District. Three other fan components/fan assembling units are also located in the same and adjoining premises.3. In purported exercise of the powers under Clause 27 of the statutory terms and conditions of supply, the respondents have treated the four establishments bearing Service Connection Nos. 1191 to 1194, as a single unit for the purpose of reckoning them as a H.T. category instead of L.T. category, which they were earlier. The reasons adduced for the exercise of power under Clause 27 as recorded in the order are worth reproduction and are as under:'(1) The product manufactured is same and they are in the nature of split up of common proce...
Sms Schloemann Siemag, A.G. Vs. Dy. Cit and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2001
Reported in: [2001]250ITR97(AP)
S.B. Sinha, C.J.Reference to this Bench has been made by a Division Bench of this court having regard to the importance of theuestion as regards the interpretation of section 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act' for brevity). Although all the writ petitions involve a similaruestion of law, the factual matrix of the matter shall be considered from Writ Petition No. 6112 of 1996.2. The writ petition relates to the assessment year 1984-85 and the original demand of assessment was made on 27-3-1987. The entire amount of tax was paid. But the order of assessment wasuestioned in an appeal. The said appeal of the assessee was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) by an order dated 31-3-1989. The assessee made a demand of refund of the amount with interest, pursuant whereto the amount was refunded along with interest in terms of section 244 of the said Act on or about 28-7-1989. The department preferred an appeal there against before the Appellate Tribu...
P. Ramachander Chetty Vs. Engineer-in-chief, Panchayat Raj Department, ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD558
ORDERS.B. Sinha, CJ 1. The petitioner seeks judicial review of the judgment dated 16-10-2000 of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'). By the said judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the OA No.794 of 2000, filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to pay interest on gratuity and other delayed retired benefits.2. The petitioner was working as Assistant Engineer in Panchayat Raj Department. It is appears that the Superintending Engineer issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner pointing out certain lapses in March, 1988. The petitioner submitted his explanation, and no further action was however taken against him. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was allowed to retire from service on 30-6-1988 on attaining the age of superannuation.3. The petitioner, however, was sanctioned 50% provisional pension and Group Insurance amount, Family Fund and Surrender Leave. Pension, gratuity and commutation were withheld purportedly on the ground that department...
Hyderabad Potteries Private Limited Vs. Collector, Hyderabad District ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(3)ALD600; 2001(3)ALT200
ORDER1. The petitioner in the instant writ petition prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the letter issued by the second respondent-Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad vide letter No.l87/TP3/2000-441, dated 26-8-2000 as arbitrary and illegal and violative of Section 429(aa) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and bye-law No.4 (2) of the building bye-laws. The petitioner consequently prays for issuance of an appropriate direction directing the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad to grant permission as prayed for in building Permit File No.187/TP3/2000.2. The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) through the impugned letter rejected the application of the petitioner for the proposed construction of stilt for parking + 5 upper floors for residential apartments consisting of Blocks A to D at premises No. 1-1-365/A, situated at Bakaram, Hyderabad. In the impugned letter, 'it is stated that the proposals of the petitioner were examined and placed before the Buildi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »