Andhra Pradesh Court December 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.
Priya Paul Yedluri Vs. Ntr University of Health Sciences and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD603; 2004(3)ALT125
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. All these writ petitions can be dealt with under a common order, since the controversy in all the writ petitions is inter-linked with one another.2. The Supreme Court in Convener, MBBS/BDS Selection Board v. Chandan Mishra, , fully endorsed the view taken by the Orissa High Court, which reads as under:'The learned Judges of the High Court, if we may say so with respect in a well-considered opinion expressed their anguish at the insensitivity of the authorities administering medical admission in the State to the need to prevent occasions for repetitive grievances from the student community and had occasion to observe:'Shakespeare in Othello has written 'Chaos is come again'. This Court has witnessed chaos almost annually when time for admission to MBBS/BDS Courses came....'3. The State of Andhra Pradesh is not an exception to the same.4. The Apex Court in Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh, : [2002]SUPP2SCR228 , after taking note of the above observation i...
B.P. Venkata Subba Reddy Vs. Y. Obanna and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD134; 2004(3)ALT214
ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. These revision petitions have been preferred by the declarant in C.C. No. 2242/ALG/75 of the Sub-Collector, Nandyal, against the orders of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, dated 26.7.1999, in L.R.A. Nos.34 of 1994 and 35 of 1994. The declarant was a surplus holder, therefore, he surrendered certain lands and they were assigned to the respondents in both these revision petitions prior to 30.4.1977 and the respondents are in possession and enjoyment of the same.2. Subsequently, on 1.2.1980 the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal of the declarant covered by L.R.A. No. 123 of ,1979, holding him as a non-surplus holder. The declarant filed an application on 28.6.1993 for redelivery of the surrendered lands. Therefore, on 16.9.1993, the sub-Collector, Nandyal, passed an order, directing the restoration of the lands, which were assigned to the respondents. The respondents being aggrieved by the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 16.9.19...
Ajmeera Govind Vs. Principal and Correspondent, Arvinda Residential Sc ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ1436; 2004(4)ALD442; 2004(5)ALT383
ORDER1. Aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, dated 20-11-1998, in awarding Rs. 75,000/- as compensation for the injuries received by him in a road accident, that has taken place on 10-8-1994, the claimant preferred this appeal.2. It is the case of the claimant that he is a resident of Jallapalli Farm Kotgir and on 10-8-1994 at about 5.30 p.m., while he was coming on a cycle on the road near Hangirga farm B.T. Road, on Pothangal check post to Kollur road, the driver of the bus bearing No. AAJ-5599 belongs to Arvindo Residential School, Bodhan, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed dashed against him due to which he fell down and the bus ran over on his legs and thereby he sustained fracture on both legs and also multiple injuries all over his body. Immediately, he was admitted in the Government Hospital at Kotgir. On the same day he was shifted to Government Hospital, Nizamabad for better tre...
Ajmeera Govind Vs. Principal and Correspondent, Arvindo Residental Sch ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-2003
Reported in: I(2005)ACC69
ORDERB.S.A. Swamy, J.1. Aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, dated 20.11.1998, in awarding Rs. 75,000/- as compensation for the injuries received by him in a road accident, that has taken place on 10.8.1994, the claimant preferred this appeal.2. It is the case of the claimant that he is a resident of Jallapalli Farm Kotgir and on 10.8.1994 at about 5.30 p.m., while he was coming on a cycle on the road near Hangirga farm B.T. Road, on Pothangal check post to Kollur Road, the driver of the bus bearing No. AAJ-5599 belongs to Arvindo Residential School, Bodhan, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed dashed against him due to which he fell down and the bus ran over on his legs and thereby he sustained fracture on both legs and also multiple injuries all over his body. Immediately, he was admitted in the Government Hospital at Kotgir. On the same day he was shifted to Government Hospital, Nizamaba...
Mohammed MohinuddIn Ali Vs. Mahesh Kumar Asava and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD880; 2004(1)ALT591
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Respondents in C.R.P. No. 6082 of 2003 had moved C.M.P. No. 28786 of 2003 in C.M.P. No. 26985 of 2003 to vacate the interim order passed in C.M.P. No. 26985 of 2003 in C.R.P. No. 6082 of 2003 and at the stage of hearing of the vacate application, Smt. C. Jayashree Sarathy, the learned Counsel representing the vacate petitioners, had raised an objection relating to the maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition on the ground that the order impugned is an interim judgment and decree made in accordance with the provisions of Order 12, Rule 6 of Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) and hence it is appealable and definitely not revisable.2. Heard the learned Counsel on record relating to the preliminary objection raised by the learned Counsel representing respondents in the Civil Revision Petition-vacate petitioners in C.M.P. No. 28786 of 2003.3. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against the order and decr...
S. Manohar Reddy Vs. G. Koteswara Rao and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD567; 2004(4)ALT69
G. Bikashapathy, J.1. Even, though Service jurisprudence has developed enormously in the recent past, yet, the intricacies continued to persist. The issues relating to fixation of appropriate seniority continued to be a confused subject as on date in spite of catena of decisions of the Apex Court.2. This case is a classic example as to how the litigation is ignited and prolonged for more than two decades and yet, the seniority is still clouded with numerous riddles. It is not only the omissions and commissions on the part of the authorities but the orders of the Tribunal issued from time to time interdicting the finalisation of the seniority and granting directions which were not warranted contributed to the delays.3. This case relates to fixation of seniority in the cadre of Assistant Prohibition and Excise Superintendent and higher posts and preparation of promotion panels from the year 1981-82 onwards and till today the situation continued to be fluid.4. It is relevant to state that...
Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Dept ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-2003
Reported in: 2004(4)ALD66; 2004(3)ALT178
G. Bikshapathy, J.1. The issue that arises for consideration in the writ petition is 'what is the mode of calculation of restoration of pension in respect of the employees covered by Rule 37-A of CCS Pension Rules, 1972 (for brevity Pension Rules).2. The practical implementation of the rule is the moot question in this case. The respondent-employee was not an applicant before the Tribunal. He filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 1345 of 2001 challenging the order issued by the Accountant General, Orissa, dated 9-5-2000 fixing the quantum of pension restored after a period of 15 years under the Pension Rules. It was his case that he was appointed as UDC in the Office of Accountant General, Orissa in Puri Branch and he was subsequently promoted as Accounts Officer on 7-4-1964. He was sent on deputation to Computer Maintenance Corporation after his name was selected by the Controller and Auditor General of India. In the said Corporation he was appointe...
Smt. Parvathi Sahu and ors. Vs. Ayyalasamayajulu Venkata Ramana and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-24-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)ALT731
T. Meena Kumari, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31-3-1997 in O.S.No. 502 of 1989 on the file of the III Addl. Subordinate Judge's Court, Visakhapatnam wherein the learned Judge dismissed the suit.2. The appellants are the legal representatives of the first plaintiff, who died during the pendency of the suit. The respondents are the defendants.3. The case of the appellants are as follows:The plaint schedule property of 19 acres forms part of the land covered by Survey No. 30 in Vepagunta Village in Pendurthy Mandal in erstwhile Visakhapatnam Taluk. Originally, the suit survey No. 30 is an extent of 42 acres 5 cents. The entire Vepagunta village was gifted to the Pagoda of Sri Sri Sri Varaha Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Varu of Simhachalam and the authorities of the said Devasthanam have granted an extent of Ac.21.021/2 cents to one late Godaarthy Narayana Acharyulu long time back out of the total extent of 42.05 cents and he was in possession and enjoyment...
Dr. K. Kesava Rao Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ALD509; 2004(2)ALT409
Motilal B. Naik, J. 1. This is a public interest litigation filed by Dr. Keshava Rao, a Senior Congress Party Leader, who has held many elective posts both in the Government of Andhra Pradesh and in the Congress Party. He is also associated with several non-governmental organizations, trade unions, and is a human rights activist besides a member of teaching faculty in Osmania University.2. Petitioner brings to the notice of the Court about maladministration prevailing in the State of Andhra Pradesh and believes President Rule could have been imposed in the State of Andhra Pradesh, as according to the petitioner, there is breakdown of constitutional machinery in the State of A.P. and as such action under Article 356 of the Constitution of India should have been initiated by the President of India. Petitioner in his endeavour to get President's Rule imposed in the State of Andhra Pradesh, invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India see...
Prakash Vs. Pushpa Vani
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)ALD858; 2004(4)ALT286
B.S.A. Swamy, J.1. The first defendant in O.S. No. 25 of 1985 on the file of the Sub-Court, Nizamabad is the appellant before this Court, The Plaintiff- respondent herein filed the above suit against the first defendant, the adopted son of one Muthyala Veerappa. Second and third defendants, who are the wife and concubine of late Veerappa respectively seeking partition of the family properties by metes and bounds into three equal shares and to allot 1/3rd share to her, she being the adoptive daughter of late Veerappa towards 1/3rd share which she is entitled to. The second defendant filed a written statement stating that the respondent herein was never taken in adoption by late Veerappa and she is the daughter of younger sister of third defendant, the concubine of late Veerappa during his lifetime. He made a provision for the stay of the third defendant-concubine by giving a house bearing Door Nos. 4-5-412 and 4-5-413 and after her death the property shall revert back to the appellant h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »