Andhra Pradesh Court March 2002 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.
Indian Airlines Limited and anr. Vs. Shakelly Mohan and Six ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD638
ORDERSrn, J. 1. This Writ Appeal by the management of the Indian Airlines is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 26.8.1997 in W.P.No.7356 of 1995. 2. The 1st respondent herein viz., Shakelly Mohan is the petitioner in the writ petition. He filed the above writ petition praying for the following relief. 'Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari and all for records and proceedings relating to an connected with the impugned Establishment order No.70 of 1995 dated 28th March, 1995 (Ref.No.HPDO1/P-1201) issued by the General Manager (Personnel) Indian Airlines Limited (Headquarters) Airlines House, New Delhi-1 and quash the same in so far as Respondents 3 to 8 are concerned and issue a consequential direction directing the Respondents 1 and 2 to...
institute of Chartered Financial Analysts of India Vs. Assistant Commi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(AP)238; [2002]256ITR115(AP)
S.R. Nayak, J.1. In both the writ petitions, the Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts of India is the petitioner. In W. P. No. 6628 of 1996, the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 5(3), TDS and Systems, Hyderabad, dated March 22, 1996, made under Section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), is assailed, whereas, in W. P. No. 7334 of 1996, the order of the same officer dated March 25, 1996, under Section 201 of the Act, is assailed. The impugned order in W. P. No. 6628 of 1996 relates to the period from April 1, 1994, to March 31, 1995, whereas the order impugned in W. P. No. 7334 of 1996 relates to the period from April 1, 1995, to June 30, 1995. Since the facts of the case and the legal questions that arise for decision in both the writ petitions are substantially similar, both the writ petitions were clubbed, heard and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.The background facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions be su...
Sarat Chatterji and Co., (Vsp) Pvt. Ltd., Visakhapatnam Vs. Visakhapat ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD641
ORDERGhulam Mohammed, J. 1. The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to collect demurrage charges on 'sweepings' in question and consequently direct the authorities to release the petitioner's cargo relating to MV Daphe, MV Star Orient, MV Lantau Trader and MV Hoyo Maru mentioned in the auction sale notice dated 28-6-1988 issued by second respondent and also hold that demurrage charges demanded on 'sweepings' in question are illegal and the public auction of cargo on the ground of unconnected or uncleared or abandoned cargo is uncalled for. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is doing business as steamer agents, stevedores, clearing and forwarding agents, ship chandlers etc., and also unloading and clearing the bulk cargo like shredded scrap, hot briqettted iron during July to December, 1986 in Visakhapatnam Port and continuing to do so, for various ships arriving in Visakhapatnam. 'Sweepings' are inevitable in the process o...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. G. Kesavulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD1; 2003(1)ALT636
Motilal B. Naik, J.1. The issues involved in these two Writ Petitions are inter-related and are heard and disposed off together by the following common order.2. Writ Petition No. 239 of 2000 is filed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue (Endts.I) Department, Hyderabad, (2) Commissioner, Endowments Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Tilak Road, Hyderabad and (3) The Assistant Commissioner, Sri Bramarambika Mallikarjuna Swamy Devasthanam, Srisailam, Kurnool District assailing the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A. No. 7137 of 1999 dated 27-12-1999. Whereas Writ Petition No. 602 of 2000 is filed by Sri G. Kesavulu, Executive Officer (under transfer), Srisailam Devasthanam questioning the competency of the Upa-Lokayukta of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, sole respondent in the said Writ Petition, in issuing the interim order on 15-11-1999 and final order on 15-12-1999 in complaint No. 792/99/...
Kuchi Charumathi Devi Vs. Gampa Chenchu Ratnamma and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALT548
C.Y. Somayajulu, J. 1. Appellant filed O.S. No. 63 of 1993 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Khammam, for partition of her half share in the four items mentioned of the plaint schedule, which are said to have been acquired by her father, 1st defendant (1st respondent) is the mother of the plaintiff-appellant, and 2nd defendant (2nd respondent herein) is said to be the son of the concubine of the father of the plaintiff-appellant, 1st defendant died during the pendency of the suit without filing written statement, 2nd respondent filed a written statement contending inter alia that the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Khammam, has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit, because items 1 to 3 of plaint schedule are in Nalgonda District and Item No. 4 of the plaint schedule was not acquired by the father of the plaintiff and is the absolute property of the 1st defendant, and so question of partition of item No. 4 does not arise during the life time of the 1st defend...
K. Balagopal Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD808; 2002(2)ALT548
I. Venkatanarayana, J. 1. The writ petition has been filed by the Secretary of the A.P. Civil Liberties Committee for issue of a writ of mandamus seeking for a declaration that the action of respondents 1 and 2 herein in granting cash reward of Rs. 10.2 lakhs to the 6th respondent herein as illegal and arbitrary.2. The facts as set out in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the writ petitioner are set out as hereunder:-The petitioner submits that A.P. Civil Liberties Committee is committed to the cause of civil rights and human rights. It appeared in the Deccan Chronicle News papers dated 13th and 14th April 1998 that the 6th respondent herein has been rewarded with Rs. 10.2 lakhs for having killed one Mr. Vijay @ Ramesh who was the District Committee Secretary of Peoples War Group, Karimnagar. It is further stated that the police ought to have registered a case of murder against the 6th respondent instead of rewarding him with cash award. Such awarding of rewards to a ...
The Krishna District Cooperative Credit Societies Employees Union, Vij ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD108; 2002(2)ALT658
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. This batch of writ petitions may be disposed of by a common order since the question that falls for consideration requiring adjudication by this court in all these writ petitions is one and the same.2. The employees working in various Primary Agricultural Credit Societies (PACS) in the State of Andhra Pradesh invoke the extra jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India mainly challenging the action of the said PACS in proposing to terminate their services pursuant to the directions issued by the District Cooperative Officers and the Divisional Cooperative Officers concerned. Some of the writ petitions are filed by the employees' unions representing the cause of the employees.3. The prayer in all the writ petitions filed by the employees' unions is one and the same, which is to the following effect:'........may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugn...
Nalgonda District Oil Millers Association, Nalgonda Vs. Government of ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)ALD538
1. The Edible Oils Packaging (Regulation) Order, 1998 ('Control Order' for brevity) was issued by the Central Government vide GSR No. 584(E), dated 17-9-1998 in exercise of their powers under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 ('the Act' for brevity). The Government of Andhra Pradesh by their orders in G.O. Ms. No. 42, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs (CS.III) Department, dated 17-5-2000 adopted compulsory packaging scheme introduced by the Control Order and decided to implement the same in phased manner. The Control Order was, however, not implemented immediately. By G.O. Ms. No. 66, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, dated 11-8-2000, the Government of Andhra Pradesli ordered to implement the Control Order with effect from 1-11-2000 in the urban areas and with effect from 1-4-2001 in the rural areas in the State. All these writ petitions are concerned with the validity of these orders.2. In this batch of writ petitions, the action of the Gover...
P.S.R. Subrahmanyam Vs. Government of A.P. and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD341; 2002(4)ALT255
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. Heard Shri HG.Krishna Murthy, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. Nanda Ramachandra Rao, learned Government Pleader for Endowments.2. This writ appeal is directed against an order dated 28th November, 2001 passed by a learned single judge of this Court in WP No. 24497 of 2001. The said writ petition was filed socking a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to Proceedings in Rc.No. A1/68540/97 dated 8-11-1999 and to quash the same as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law. The learned single judge, however, dismissed the writ petition by the impugned judgment dated 28-11-2001. Challenging the said judgment, the present writ appeal has been filed by the writ petitioner,3. This case has a chequered history. The appellant herein, earlier, filed W.P. No. 11835 of 1997 seeking to quash the order passed by the Commissioner of Endowments in his Proceedings R.C.No. A1/ 24393/97-31, dated 7-6-1997 transferring him to Simhacha...
D. Nagaraj Vs. S. Balaram and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2002
Reported in: 2002(1)ALD(Cri)542; 2002(2)ALT(Cri)22; [2002]112CompCas502(AP)
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. 1st respondent filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short the Act) against the petitioner alleging that the cheque dated 24.3.1999 issued by the petitioner in discharge of the debt due to him was dishonoured and that in spite of his sending statutory notice informing him about the dishonour of the cheque and demanding payment of the amount covered by the cheque, petitioner did not make the payment. The same was taken on file by the learned Magistrate.2. Petitioner who is the accused in the said complaint filed this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in the C.C. on the ground that there is no legally enforceable debt due from him to the 1st respondent as the same is barred by time and also because averments in the complaint do not disclose that statutory notice of dishonour was served on the petitioner. Which is the sine qua non for initiation of criminal proceeding by relying on M.S. Shak...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »