Andhra Pradesh Court July 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.
K. Ravindranath Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD609; 2002(4)ALT288
S.R. Nayak, J .1. These writ petitions are filed by the employees of the erstwhile M/s. Andhra Pradesh Scooters Limited. In these writ petitions, the petitioners -employees have questioned the validity of the actions of the respondents to close down the A.P. Scooters Limited and in terminating or seeking to terminate their services and for direction to the respondent to take necessary steps to absorb their services in the Departments of the Government by protecting their pay-scales, seniority and continuity in service in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, General Administration (PE.I) Department in Letter No. 3 48/PE. 1/90-1, dated 25-5-1991, directing the Governmental authorities to lend financial assistance to the A.P. Scooters Limited for revival of the company, to accommodate all the employees of the A.P. Scooters Limited in Government departments in the event of winding up of that company etc. Thepetitioners have also by way of amendments qu...
M. Ganesh Vs. South Central Railway, Rep. by Its Divisional Railway Ma ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD684; [2003(96)FLR897]; (2002)IIILLJ999AP
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. This writ appeal filed by the unsuccessful writ petitioner is directed against the order of the learned single judge dated 23.2.2001 made in Writ Petition No.8665/2000. In the said writ petition, the petitioner assailed the proceedings No. YH/148/W.III issued by the Divisional Railway Manager (Works), Hyderabad Division, South Central Railways, Secunderabad, the 1st respondent herein and the proceedings No. 8/008/200022, dt. 28.4.2000 of the Assistant Labour Commissioner (CI), Office of the Regional Commissioner, ATI, Hyderabad, the 3rd respondent.2. It appears that the appellant-petitioner is a contractor by profession. Having undertaken certain works and executed the same from the Railways, according to the petitioner, a sum of Rs.61,200/- due to the petitioner has been withheld by the railway administration in view of the order made by the 3rd respondent dated 28.4.2000 directing the railway administration to pay a sum of Rs. 61,200/- to the 4th respondent. It ...
Cement Corp. of India Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Anantap ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)ALD59
ORDERL. Narasimba Reddy, J. 1. The petitioner, Cement Corporation of India Limited, challenges the Award of the Labour Court, Anantapur, dated 18-6-1990 in a batch of cases filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for brief 'the ID Act'). 2. The petitioner runs a cement factory at Yerraguntla in Cuddapah district. As part of its activity, it awarded a labour contract to the 3rd respondent, a labour contractor.The 3rd respondent, in turn, has engaged respondents 4 to 222 (for brief 'the contract labour') for doing various kinds of jobs assigned to them. 4. The contract labour moved the Labour Court, 1st respondent herein, by filing applications under Section 33-C(2) of the ID Act claiming that the Cement Industry Wage Board has prescribed rates of wages to be paid to various categories of employees working in the cement industry and that their contractor, the 3rd respondent herein, and the principal employer, the petitioner herein, were not paying the wages as per the...
V. Rama Krishna Reddy Vs. Commissioner Narasaraopet Municipality, Nara ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD892
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J. 1. Heart Shri D. Krishna Murthy, learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records in OS No. 2 of 2002 on the file of Lok Adalat, Narasaraopet and quash the same and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to restore the suit schedule land to Narasaraopet Municipality.3. This writ petition was filed by one v. Ramakrishna Reddy as public interest litigation. According to him, he is questioning the alleged collusive action of the respondents 1, 3, 4 and 5 in grabbing the land which is public property in an extent of 54-52 square yards by abusing the process of law by filing O.S.No.2 of 2002 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet in the first instance and subsequently getting it transferred to Lok Adalat for passing a collusive Award on 5-2-2002. The circumstances that compelled the petitioner to file the writ petition have been elaborately stated in the writ petition in ...
Syed Jamil Ahmed (Died) Per Lrs. Vs. Meer Ahmed Ali Khan (Died) Per Lr ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-2002
Reported in: 2002(6)ALD318; 2002(5)ALT174
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 2-12-1999 made in IA No. 757/1999 in OS No. 133/1998 on the file of the learned in Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.2. The petitioners herein are the defendants in the suit OS No. 3487 of 1992 on the file of the VI Asst. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. One late Meer Ahmed Ali Khan (father of respondents 1 and 2 herein), had filed the suit alleging that he is the Muthavalli of the suit property and sought for eviction of late Syed Jameel Ahmed (father of the petitioners herein). The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant. Against the said judgment and the decree, the respondents' father herein filed AS No. 133/1998 on the file of the m Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant died. The respondents herein filed IA No. 757/1999 seeking to come on record as legal represen...
Vakicherla Santha Rao Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)ALD681; 2002(4)ALT556
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.1. By consent of learned Counsel for the parties, both the writ appeal and the writ petition are taken up for hearing and disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellant herein is a firm engaged in contract business. The respondents assigned it with certain lease works viz., to remove the over matured Eucalyptus or jungle bushes etc., from the identified area covered under the lease within the stipulated time. The parties have entered into an agreement to that effect on 28-4-1998. Since the appellant has failed tocomplete the lease work even within the extended period of contract, as per the terms of contract, not only the contract awarded to the appellant was terminated by one Mr. Veera Rajulu who according to the appellant is the then Head of C&LD;, but also the security deposit and the EMD furnished by the appellant were also forfeited. It is made clear in the impugned order No. SCF/C&LD;/PT-1/Rev/97-C-49825, dated 10-12-1999 that the termination of the cont...
Smt. Karre Iylamma Vs. the Commissioner, Kapra Municipality and 2 ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD621
ORDERS.R. Nayak, J.1. This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 11.9.1998 made in W.P. No. 25679 of 1998.2. The appellant is the writ petitioner and she 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 a writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, (a) Directing the respondents to initiate and complete the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the land of the petitioner bearing plot No. 4 in S. No. 137 admeasuring 237.1 Square yards situated at Laxminagar, Mallapur village, Uppal mandal, R.R. Dist., and declare the action of the respondents is illegal, arbitrary, and violating the Art. 14, 31-A and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violating the Sections 33 and 34 of the A.P. Town Planning Act 1920, (b) further dire...
P. Venkata Chalapathi Vs. P. Girija
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC600
C.Y. Somayujulu, J.1. Defendant in O.S. No. 201 of 1982 on the file of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirupati, is the appellant.2. Respondent filed the suit seeking maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month besides Rs. 2,000/- towards clothing and shelter with a charge on the plaint 'A' schedule property, against the appellant alleging that the marriage between her and the appellant, who is an employee at Tirumala, took place and on 25.7.1971 at Srikalahasti and after marriage they lived at Tirumala. Appellant at the instance of his relatives began treating her cruelly and drove her away from his house, and did not take her back to his society and filed O.P. 38/72 seeking restitution of conjugal rights, which was dismissed on merits by the Trial Court and confirmed in appeal by this Court in A.A.O. No. 807 of 1979, holding that she is justified in living away from the appellant.In his written statement, appellant admitted the marriage between him and the respondent and denied...
S. Masthan Saheb and anr. Etc. Vs. P.S.R. Anjaneyulu and ors. Etc.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-01-2002
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)706; 2003CriLJ248
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The four writ petitions are filed by different persons of different places against the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool, Sub-Inspectors of Police and Station House Officers, III Town Police Station and IV Town Police Station, Kurnool. The main complaint in the writ petitions is that the petitioners are against the alleged interference by the police in civil disputes. Therefore, the learned Government Pleader was directed to file counter-affidavits duly sworn to by the Superintendent of Police. Accordingly counter-affidavits have been filed by the Head of the District Police. The matters were heard together and are disposed of by common order.2. The allegations and averments in the affidavits may be noticed briefly. In W.P. No. 19056 of 2001, the petitioner is a businessman dealing in vegetable seeds. The second petitioner is an Advocate at Kurnool. It is alleged that the son of the first petitioner married S. Sameena Afroze in the year 1995. On 22-3-2001, the se...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›