Andhra Pradesh Court July 2003 Judgments

P. Ramachandraiah Vs. the Commissioner, Hindupur Municipality

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD571

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The petitioners are owners of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.8.35 in S.Nos.486/2 and 487/1 of Hindupur. They made an application for conversion of the agricultural land to non-agricultural land which was duly granted. Later, they submitted a lay out dividing the land into eighty plots. Same was approved in 1992. As per municipal lay out rules petitioners donated land earmarked for roads, parks and for community purpose to the respondent Municipality. The respondent issued a demand notice dt.24.9.1996 under Rule 29(1) of Taxation Rules contained in Schedule II of A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 (for short, the Act) read with Section 130 of the Act calling upon the petitioners to pay an amount of Rs.97,512/- towards vacant land tax. The petitioners were also informed that if they fail to pay the amount, they will be prosecuted in accordance with Rule 30(2) of the Taxation Rules. Assailing the said demand notice, present Writ Petition is filed contending that the s...

P. Rama Murthy Vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD326

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner alleges that he is the owner of the land admeasuring Ac.0.16 guntas in S.No. 54, Daira Village, Aravind Nagar, Domalguda, Hyderabad. He filed this writ petition alleging that on 12-9-1994 staff of second respondent came to the locality and levelled the land for laying road in spite of his objections. Therefore, the petitioner submits that any such action without due process of law under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 or the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or other laws is arbitrary and illegal.2. This Court while admitting the Writ Petition on 2-3-1995 granted interim direction to stop work of laying road in the said land.3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipal Corporation.4. In P. Lakshmana Rao, v. Executive Officer, : 2000(5)ALT246 (DB), a Division Bench of this Court issued directions to be followed by Municipal authorities, Panchayat authorities and Revenue authorities for acquiring the land...

Larsen and Toubro Limited Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [2003]132STC272(AP)

ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J.1. These two special appeals arise out of the common order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes relating to assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. Since the grounds of appeals and issues are common in these two special appeals, they are being disposed of by this common order.2. When these special appeals are taken up for consideration, the learned Special Government Pleader for Taxes appraised us about the Department filing T.R.C. No. 14 of 1999 against the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and stated that the said TRC is also connected with these two Special Appeals and urged this Court to decide T.R.C. No. 14 of 1999 along with these two special appeals. Hence, we called for the records relating to T.R.C. No. 14 of 1999 and took up for consideration along with these two special appeals.3. Before we set out to decide the controversy arising out of these two Special Appeals and T.R.C. No. 14 of 1999, few facts are necessary to be recorded...

Usha Rani Vs. N. Sridhar

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD803; I(2004)DMC300

S. Ananda Reddy, J 1. Since both the appeals involve common questions of fact and law, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The appellant in both the appeals is the wife and the respondent is the husband. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as Appellant-wife and Respondent-husband respectively.3. CMA No. 2517 of 2000 is filed by the appellant-wife aggrieved by the order of the learned Family Judge, Hyderabad dated 3.7.2000 made in O.P. No. 6 of 1995 whereas C.M.A. No. 2518 of 2000 is directed against the order in O.P. No. 592 of 1997.4. The brief facts leading to the filing of the O.Ps. be stated as under: The Respondent-husband filed O.P. No. 6 of 1995 under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act) for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The marriage between the parties took place on 8.12.1993 at Visakhapatnam. According to the Re...

Girijan Co-op. Corporation Ltd. Vs. Imalla Srinivasa Rao

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(6)ALT298

1. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of a learned single Judge in A.S.No. 2663 of 1993, dated 03-4-2003, this LPA is preferred under Section 15 of the Letters Patent Act.2. The respondent herein was removed from service on the basis of an inquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer in RC.No. 209/79/A(VJA), dated 03-2-1980. Aggrieved by the order dated 29-6-1981, the respondent preferred an appeal but the same was dismissed by the Vice-Chairman and Managing Director on 15-9-1981 and the suit in O.S.No. 331 of 1983 filed by the respondent was met with the same fate. Hence, he carried the matter in appeal in A.S.No. 2663 of 1993 on the file of this court. The learned Judge having heard the matter at length in a reasoned order was confined to set aside the order of dismissal and ordered reinstatement of the appellant with backwages, since the Enquiry Officer miserably failed to follow the procedure prescribed in Chapter-IV of Disciplinary, Suspension and Appeal Rules for imposition ...

Gadi V. Kaleswara Rao Vs. Superintendent of Post Offices and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President: 1. The complainant is the appellant herein. His case is that he is fully qualified for the post of Judicial Officer and accordingly he sent an application to the High Court of Delhi through speed post with the opposite parties by paying Rs. 60/- towards transmiting charges. The last date for receipt of the application was 30.3.2002 before 5.00 p.m. As he did not receive the acknowledgement he made a complaint to the first opposite party who in turn asked the second opposite party to take necessary action. But there is no response from the second opposite party. Hence he filed the complaint. 2. It is admitted by the opposite parties that the complainant sent the cover through speed post on 27.3.2002 while the last date is 30.3.2002. As 29.3.2002 happened to be Good Friday and 30.3.2002 is Saturday and 31.3.2002 being Sunday the speed post could not be delivered. However it is delivered on 1.4.2002. 3. The District Forum found that 30.3.2002 being Saturda...

Md. Maqdoom Ahmed and anr. Vs. Special Deputy Collector Land Acquisiti ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(4)ALD715

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. An interesting question of law as to whether it is competent for the Land Acquisition Officer/Collector to condone the delay in filing application under Section 28A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) as amended by Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 seeking re-determination of the compensation arises for consideration in this Writ Petition.2. Shaik Ahmed was owner of land admeasuring Ac.13.19 guntas in S.No. 659 of Patancheru Village. In the year 1976 the respondent acquired the land for public purpose to wit for establishment of Industrial Development Area, Patancheruvu under Phase-Ill. After following the procedure, the respondent passed Award on 21.5.1977 giving compensation of Rs. 5,500/- per acre. Shaik Ahmed received the compensation under protest and made application allegedly on 23.5.1977 along with two others requesting the respondent to refer the matter under Section 18(1) of the Act. Award was passed in respect of the lands bel...

Ramavathu Rambabu Vs. Apsrtc and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD146; 2003(6)ALT42

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J. 1. Petitioner seeks writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the respondents 2 and 3 in not refunding the E.M.D. amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- with interest, as illegal and arbitrary.2. Facts in brief are that the respondent - A. P. State Road Transport Corporation (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') issued a tender notification on 10.8.2002 for the allotment of shops on licence basis. The petitioner was one of the successful bidders and as per the terms of the tender notification, he paid an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- in the month of August, 2002. Thereafter, the Corporation issued the order of licence dated 24.10.2002 and required the petitioner to enter into an agreement and pay the balance amount of E.M.D. i.e., about Rs. 7,50,000/- within fifteen days from the receipt of the said order of licence. It is stated that the said order of licence was received by the petitioner on 18.11.2002 and he has to pay the balance amount within fifte...

D.V.N. Linga Reddy Vs. Vasavi Co-operative Urban Bank Limited and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD299

L. Narasimha Reddy, J. 1. In this batch of writ petitions, common questions of fact and law arise. Hence they are disposed of through a common judgment. 2. The petitioners in this batch of writ petitions are employed in the Vasavi Cooperative Urban Limited, Hyderabad, the 1st respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank'). Through individual orders dated 19-4-2003, their services were terminated. The reasons for termination, as stated in the orders, are that there is severe liquidity crises in the Bank, resulting in imposition of restrictions on the normal business by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 35A of the Banking Regulations Act and that the limits of expenditure imposed under Section 116C of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act (For short 'the Societies Act') and the staffing pattern approved thereunder, were exceeded. The petitioners were extended the benefits of one month's notice pay, service compensation contemplated under Section 47 of the A.P. Shops and Es...

Ravi Rishi Educational Society and anr. Vs. Osmania University and ors ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(5)ALD799

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. These two writ petitions can be disposed of by common order as the background is same. Writ Petition No. 4494 of 2003 is filed by Ravi Rishi Educational Society, Hyderabad (for short the Society) and Sant Samarth Institute of Management, Bhongir for short, the Institute), whereas Writ Petition No. 4872 of 2003 is filed by 25 students of First Year M.B.A., studying in the institute. In both the writ petitions the petitioners pray that the action of the respondent Osmania University in not permitting the students of the Institute to appear for First Semester M.B.A., Examinations for the academic year 2002-2003 as illegal, and for a declaration that the action of the Osmania University in not treating the students as students of College affiliated to Osmania University as illegal. Consequently, a direction is also sought directing Osmania University to permit the petitioners to appear for First Semester M.B.A, Examinations.2. During the pendency of these two writ pet...