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.
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. K. Gopala Krishana (Died) and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT210; (2003)IIILLJ130AP
Bilal Nazki, J. 1. This is a writ petition filed by the Union of India challenging the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in O.A. No. 518 of 1995 on 19.3.1998. 2. 1st respondent was prematurely retired. Thereafter he approached the Tribunal. The facts leading to filing of the O.A. and this writ petition are summarized below, 1st respondent was appointed as Sorter in R.M.S. wing of the Postal Department on 19.4.1963. Thereafter he was promoted to L.S.G. with effect from 2.9.1983 and he was allowed to cross efficiency bar in 1993. He completed 30 years of qualifying service in the department as on 18.4.1993. The case of 1st respondent was reviewed along with other officials of the region who had completed 30 years of qualifying service or 55 years of age for the quarter ending 30.9.1993 under the provisions of D.G. (P) Letter No. 135/133/77/SPB.II, dated 15.3.1978. A Review Committee was constituted with the Post Master General, Visakhapatnam as Chairma...
B. Manmad Reddy Vs. Dr. Chandraprakash Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ALD540; 2003(2)ALT356
Bilal Nazki, J. 1. These five Writ petitions are in fact directed against a common order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos. 5025/99 and 6271/2001 dated 7-12-2001. All the Writ petitions raise same questions of law and fact therefore they are decided by this common judgment. 2. The detailed facts have been mentioned by the Tribunal in its order. Shorn of details:- The O.As were filed before the Tribunal challenging Note-1(i) and Note-6 of rule-3 of G.O. Ms. No. 505, dated 16-11-1998 as being violative of the fundamental rights being discriminatory in character. The Tribunal accepted the contentions and quashed Note-1(i) and Note-6 of Rule-3 of G.O. Ms. No. 505, dated 16-11-98. 3. Now, the only question which is to be answered by this Court is whether the Note-1(i) and Note-6 of rule-3 of G.O. Ms. No. 505 is unconstitutional, or not. Therefore, before going to the arguments on either side it will be necessary to reproduce the relevant portions of the G.O. Th...
Y. Venkataramana Reddy Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD47; 2003(2)ALT63
Bilal Nazki, J.1. The petitioner was removed from service on charge of unauthorised absence by an order dated 28-2-1974. His appeal was disposed of on 10-7-1974 confirming the penalty. Thereafter the petitioner made a representation to the Minister of Railways on 21-7-2000 seeking compassionate allowance. This was rejected by an order dated 6-2-2001. Thereafter he filed the O.A. before the Tribunal which was dismissed. Hence the writ petition seeking quashing of the order of Minister dated 6-2-2001.2. The order which was communicated to the petitioner reads as under:'With reference to your representation cited, it is advised that on the charge of unauthorised absence, the penalty of removal from service with effect from 28-2-1974 was imposed on you by the Divisional Mechanical Engineer/L/Vijayawada. Your appeal was also disposed of on 10-7-1974 by confirming the said penalty.After a lapse of 26 years, you have now made a representation for grant of pension and gratuity stating that you...
A. Srinivasa Rao and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD134; 2003(2)ALT347
ORDERE. Dharma Rao, J.1. Against the proposed action of the respondents to corporatize the Special Protection Force constituted under The Andhra Pradesh Special Protection Force Act, 1991 (Act 25 of 1991), this writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring that the first respondent has no legal and constitutional competence or authority and to declare that it is beyond the legislative competence and executive powers of the State and to further declare that the provisions of the Company's Act or other provisions cannot enable the respondents to corporatize which is repugnant to the provisions of the Constitution of India. 2. It is averred in the affidavit that the petitioners herein are all members of the Andhra Pradesh Special Protection Force. Apart from independent recruitment, the petitioners and other employees of the Protection Force are among BSF, CRPF, TBP and Assam Rifles all coming under Central Police Organisations under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Go...
Buddha Mahalakshmi Naidu (Died) and anr. Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALT(Cri)462
K.C. Bhanu, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment in C.C. No. 16/1993, dated 30.10.1996, on the file of the Special Jude for S.P.E. & A.C.B. Cases-cum-III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, wherein the accused-appellant was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the same Act. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that on 23.1.1993 at about 9.00 a.m., P.W.1, an Advocate, approached the accused-appellant for payment of land revenue, that he...
Krishi Foundry Employees Union Vs. Krishi Engines Limited and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD392; [2003]117CompCas340(AP); (2003)IILLJ798AP
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, Adv.Introduction1. M/s. Krishi Engines Limited (hereinafter called, holding company) was ordered to be wound up by this Court by judgment dated 16.10.2000 passed in C.P. No. 64 of 1997. The Official Liquidator attached to this Court was appointed as Provisional Liquidator under Section 452 of Companies Act, 1956 (for short, the Act). The liquidation process of the holding company is at final stages. M/s. Krishi Foundry Employees Union (hereinafter called, the Union) filed a claim petition with Official Liquidator along with workers of the holding company. The Official Liquidator after adjudication of their claim passed an order dated 15.4.1997 to the effect that the claim of the Union cannot be included in the claim of the workmen of holding company in liquidation against estate of the holding company. When the Official Liquidator adjudicated claim of the union the subsidiary company was not in liquidation. Be it also noted that the order of the Official Liquidator dat...
Andugula Vijayalakshmi Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD284; 2003(1)ALT738
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. Elections to the Gram Panchayat of Varahapatnam, Kaikaluru Mandal, Krishna District, were conducted on 14-8-2001. The post of Sarpanch is reserved for Scheduled Caste Woman category. The petitioner contested for the post of Sarpanch along with the 4th respondent and was declared elected. Of the total 1693 votes polled, the petitioner obtained 806 and the 4th respondent 793 votes. Consequently the petitioner was declared elected as a Sarpanch with a margin of 13 votes. The petitioner obtained caste certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer and on that basis the petitioner was considered as belonging to Scheduled Caste community and her nomination accepted and consequent on the result she was declared as elected. During the course of elections the 4th respondent raised objections before the Election Officer regarding the validity of the nomination of the petitioner. The objections not having been accepted, after the elections the 4th respondent filed an el...
Rapolu Yadagiri Vs. Rapolu Lakshmamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP300; 2003(2)ALD445; 2003(5)ALT380
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The plaintiffs, respondents 1 to 3 herein, filed the suit being O.S. No. 1059 of 1985 on the file of the Court of IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for partition of plaint schedule properties. The Trial Court by judgment and decree dated 11.7.1990 passed a preliminary decree directing that plaint schedule properties shall be divided into 48 equal shares and 1/48th share shall be allotted to each of the plaintiffs, and each of defendants 1 to 4 shall be allotted 9/48th share. The Trial Court also restrained defendants 1 to 5 from interfering with peaceful possession of the first plaintiff over item No. 2 of the plaint schedule. Aggrieved by the preliminary decree, the first defendant has filed the present appeal.2. First plaintiff is wife of one Narasimha, plaintiffs 2 and 3 are his daughters and defendants 1 to 5 are his sons. In brief it is the case of the plaintiffs (respondents 1 to 3 herein) that Rapolu Narasimha, husband of the first plaintiff...
Gheetirala Rama Murthy Vs. Gheetirala Venugopal and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD415; 2003(2)ALT668
T. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant, who filed the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 20.12.1994 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Markapur in O.S.No. 93 of 1987. The suit was filed for partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs half share in the plaint A and B schedule properties and for future profits and costs.2. The facts lie in a narrow compass: The plaintiff and the defendant are brothers and members of a Joint Hindu family. Their father by name Pullaiah died in the year 1969 leaving no ancestral properties. He had four sons. The eldest and the second son got themselves divided and left the family. The plaintiff and the defendant continued as the members of the joint family even subsequent to the death of their father and continued the Coffee Powder business. They also started Ice Fruit manufacturing business in the year 1980. The Coffee Powder business thrived well and they could make substantial profits out of their busin...
Gullipalli Naram Naidu Vs. Kinthali Kumaraswami
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: AIR2003AP481; 2003(2)ALD544; 2003(2)ALT406
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J. 1. These two Civil Revision Petitions can be disposed of by a common order for they arise of two different interlocutory orders passed in the same suit being O.S. No. 37 of 1999 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bobbili. 2. CRP No. 3818 of 2002 is directed against the order dated 14-8-2002, passed by the Junior Civil Judge allowing the application, filed by the plaintiff-respondent in LA. No. 485 of 1999, under Order XIII, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short 'CPC') for receiving the registered sale deed, dated 12-10-1988, namely the original of Ex. A1. While CRP No. 3819 of 2002 is directed against the order dated 14-8-2002, passed by the Junior Civil Judge allowing the application, filed by the plaintiff-respondent in IA No. 486 of 1999, under Order XVIII, Rule 17 CPC for recalling PW1 for marking the registered sale deed dated 12-10-1988. 3. In the affidavits filed in support of the aforementioned applications, it is stated by t...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »