Andhra Pradesh Court January 2003 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.
P. Venkataramaiah and ors. Vs. the Station House Officer, Chittamur Po ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALT494
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The five petitioners are residents of Pittivanipalli village in Chittamuru Mandal of Nellore District.They seek a writ of mandamus to quash Crime No.28 of 1990 on the file of Chittamuru Police Station, on the ground that the FIR does not disclose any ingredients of Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC' for brevity) and also on the ground that the alleged offence has been compounded under Section 59(1) of the A.P. Forest Act, 1967 ('the Act'). 2. The facts in brief may be noticed. All the petitioners are related. They claim to be working with one Pachigarla Ramanaiah, who is dealing in charcoal. One Pulla Reddy, Sarpanch of Mallam village appears to have made a representation to the District Collector, Nellore alleging that one P.Ramanaiah cut trees of Juli Flora (Karra Tumma) in the lands classified as assessed waste poramboke. In that connection, the Mandal Revenue Officer (M.R.O.), Chittamuru, sent up a complaint to the first respondent namely, Stat...
Md. Sukur Miya and anr. Vs. Singareni Collieries Company Limited and o ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD335; 2003(3)ALT765
ORDERS. Ananda Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed by two of the workers of the 1st Respondent Company praying for the issue of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in terminating the services of the Petitioners on medical grounds, without providing the alternative employment, as per the provisions of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'), as illegal, unjust and for a consequential direction to the respondents to provide alternative job to the petitioners.2. It is stated that the first petitioner was appointed on 1-12-1991 as a Coal Filler. While he was in service, on 30-8-1997, he met with an accident and later he was provided medical treatment in the Area Hospital of the 1st Respondent Company. Later, the 1st Petitioner was referred to the Medical Board as to his medical fitness to continue in the job. Basing on the findings of the Medical Boar...
All India Sc and St Railway Employees Association Vs. E. Venkateshwarl ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD384; 2003(3)ALT674
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. This writ petition is filed by All India SC and ST Railway Employees Association, Head Office at New Delhi, Zonal Office at Secunderabad, represented by its Divisional Secretary (for short 'the Association'), for 'issuance of a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus, declaring the respondents to order re-elections according to law after cancelling the elections held on 10-1-2003 as arbitrary, null and void and consequently to direct respondent No. 7 not to recognize the elected members and office bearers and to conduct fresh elections according to bye-laws of All India SC and ST Railway Employees Association Guidelines issued by the Railway Board.'2. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, sworn to by one K. Nageswara Rao S/o. K.P. Naganna, enumerates the irregularities said to have been committed during the course of election and it is stated that in view of those irregularities, the election held to ...
Gorrela Varalakshmi Vs. Gundu Ratnam @ Ratnavathi and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD859; 2003(2)ALT599
P.S. Narayana, J. 1. At the request and with the consent of both the Counsel, the main Civil Miscellaneous Appeal itself is heard by this Court and the same is being disposedof. 2. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the unsuccessful petitioner in E.A.No.145 of 2002 in E.P. No.32 of 2001 in O.S. No.7 of 2000 in the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, East Godavari District. 3. The facts in nutshell are as specified hereunder. The appellant herein, the petitionerin E.A. No.145 of 2002 in E.P. No.32 of 2001 in O.S. No.7 of 2000 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, is the decree holder in E.P.No.25 of 2002. in O.S. No.7 of 2002 on the file of the same Court. The second respondent is the judgment debtor in both the execution petitions. The first respondent, the decree holder in E.P.32 of 2001 in O.S.No.7 of 2000, brought the schedule property for sale in the said E.P. and the appellant filed an application E.A.No.98 of 2002 praying for the relief of r...
Md. Roshanlal Khan and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD309
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. The petitioners seek a Writ of Certiorari for quashing G.O.Ms.No. 76 (Housing RH-1) Department dated 29-5-1999 issued by the 1st respondent and a consequential direction to give effect to the Service Rules of the 2nd respondent contained in G.O. Ms. No. 33 dated 26-5-1998. 2. The 2nd respondent - A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') is a Government Company. The petitioners were employed therein as Junior Assistant and Typistrespectively and their services were regularised on 1-1-1990 and 1-1-1985. 3. In accordance with the relevant provisions in the Articles of Association of the Corporation, the Government framed the A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), through its orders in G.O. Ms. No. 33 dated 26-5-1998. The same were published in the A.P. Gazette dated 5-6-1998. Annexure I of the Rules insofar as it relates to appointment to the post of Senior A...
Md. AliuddIn Farooqui (Died) by Lrs. and ors. Vs. Mohd. Karamath Hussa ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD528
B.S.A. Swamy, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the record. 2. Since there is no decided case on the present issue, we have considered the issue elaborately and the following judgment is rendered. 3. The judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge at Sangareddy in O.S. No. 45 of 1982 passed on 31-8-1987 dismissing the suit for partition, the plaintiffs in the suit filed this appeal. 4. For the sake of convenience we refer the parties as arrayed in the suit. 5. The plaintiffs (7 in number) filed O.S.45 of 1982 against one Mohd. Vilayath Hussain seeking partition of the properties in A and B schedule properties and one ninth share in E schedule properties by metes and bounds and for separate possession. They also contended that they are the distant kindred of Mustafa Hussain along with Mohd. Vilayath Hussain being the children of one Mahaboobunnisa Begum late sister of the 1st defendant, i.e., Vilayat Hussain, the children of Raza Hussain predeceased consa...
Maddukuri Mastan Rao Vs. Maddukuri Venkateswarlu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(6)ALD642; 2003(5)ALT165
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri N. Srirama Murthy, Counsel for the appellant and Sri Chidambaram, Counsel representing the respondent.2. The unsuccessful defendant in AS.No. 52/82 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Chirala is the present appellant. The respondent/plaintiff instituted the suit OS No. 690/80 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Chirala for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from closing the passage of 15 links width and 41 links length which was shown in the plaint plan CC1 EF in any manner whatsoever. At the appellate stage, the plaint was amended seeking the relief of declaration of title as well. The Trial Court on the strength of the respective pleadings of the parties had settled the Issues and had examined PW1 to PW8 and DW-1 to DW-3 and also marked Exs.A-1 to A-15, Exs.B-1 to B-5 and Ex.X-1 and had ultimately came to the conclusion that the plaintiff has neither possession nor title over the suit schedule site and had dismissed the suit and a...
G. Maisaiah Vs. A.P. State Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALT644
Elipe Dharma Rao, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Jayaprakash Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. K. Harinath, learned standing counsel for the APSRTC.2. This case has a chequered history. It is the 5th round of litigation for the petitioner who is now before this Court by way of filing the present writ petition. For the purpose of understanding the controversy raised in this case, it is necessary to elucidate briefly the facts leading to filing of the present writ petition. The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation by an order dated 5-1-1984. However, on certain alleged irregularities, his services were terminated with effect from 5-9-1984 without affording him any opportunity of explaining his case or conducting any enquiry into the alleged misconduct. Questioning the said termination order, he filed W.P.No. 14238 of 1984 before this Court, which was allowed on 18-12-1985 by this Court and the order of termination was...
Navayuga Engineering Company Limited Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-27-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)ALD291; 2003(1)ALT759; 2003(2)ARBLR53(AP)
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. This petitioner seeks a writ of declaration that the action of the respondents in not pre-qualifying and issuing the tender schedules/documents to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and also violative of principles of natural justice and further for a consequential direction to supply the tender documents for the works mentioned in the pre-qualification notice published in New Indian Express news paper dated 5.8.2002 and consider the same along with other bids.2. The case of the petitioner briefly is that the petitioner is registered company under the provisions of Indian Companies Act and it is a special class civil contractor with the Government of Andhra Pradesh as well as Union of India. The petitioner specialises in construction of bridges and other similar structures apart from undertaking specialized civil engineering works. The 2nd respondent herein issued a pre-qualification notification dated 5.8.2002 published in New Indian Express news paper invi...
M.B. Ratnam and ors. Vs. Revenue Divisional Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)ALD826; 2003(1)ALT688
B. Sudershan Reddy, J. 1. Thepetitioners invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and accordingly pray for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ calling for the records and the orders dated 6-4-2002 passed in Appeal Nos.A2/3823 to 3829 of 2001 and quash the same. The impugned order passed by the first respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, East Division, Ranga Reddy district, is challenged on various grounds. 2. Before we consider the question as to the validity of the impugned order, it may be relevant to notice a few facts leading to filing of this writ petition.3. The petitioners claim to have purchased the land ad measuring about Ac.50-39 guntas in Survey Nos.163, 164/1, 165 to 170, 170/1, 172/1, 173, 174, 177 to 179 situated at Gundlapochampalli, Medchal mandal, Ranga Reddy District, under an agreement of sale dated 15-01-1980; two unregistered sale deeds dated 16-08-1989 and two registered sale dee...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »