Andhra Pradesh Court March 2005 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.
Thanda Venkanna Vs. Mandal Educational Officer, Mandal Praja Parishad ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-10-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD88
ORDERC.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Memo dated 17-11-2004, removing the petitioner from the Chairmanship of School Education Committee, on the ground that none of his children is studying in the school, is impugned in this petition, by the petitioner.2. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that since Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the A.P. School Education (Community Participation) Rules, 1998 (the Rules), specifically lays down that procedure prescribed in Rule 8 has to be followed in case of recall, and since the procedure for recall of a Member and/or Chairman prescribed in Rule 8 of the Rules is admittedly not followed, removal of the petitioner from the Chairmanship of the Parent Teacher Association of the school by the impugned memo is liable to be set aside. The contention of the learned Government Pleader is that no child of the petitioner admittedly is studying in the school and since Section 5(4) of the A.P. School Education (Community Participation) Act, 1998 (the ...
Ch. Ravinder Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Its Secretary to ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)25; 2005(2)ALT721
ORDERV. Eswaraiah, J.1. The petitioner seeks to issue writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 4 in not taking steps to fill up eight posts of Additional Public Prosecutors in the Courts of Additional District Judges and also Subordinate Courts in Ranga Reddy District as illegal and arbitrary and violative of Part-Ill of the Constitution of India, and consequently declare the action of respondents 1 to 4 calling for second panel for the post of Additional Public Prosecutor in I Additional District Judge's Court, Ranga Reddy District, ignoring the first panel sent in the month of August/September, 2003 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and Andhra Pradesh Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Instructions, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'Instructions') issued in G. O. Ms. No. 187 dt. 6-12-2000 and also violative of Part-III of the Constitution of India.2. The undisp...
Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors. Vs. Mohd. Taher Ali
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD153; 2005(3)ALT637
1. The writ petitioners are Government of Andhra Pradesh and others. They filed the present writ petition for issuance of a writ of certiorari calling for the records connected with order dated 2.12.2003 in O.A.No. 467 of 2003 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (in short referred to as the Tribunal hereinafter) and pass such other suitable orders. 2. The learned Government Pleader for Services-I representing the writ petitioners would contend that though opportunity had been given, no explanation was forthcoming from the respondent and hence it cannot be said that no reasonable opportunity was given to the respondent-applicant in the OA. The learned Counsel also would maintain that as far as the quantum of punishment is concerned, it is within the purview of the disciplinary authority and hence interfering with the order on the ground that it is shockingly disproportionate cannot be sustained in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Per contra, Sri A. Hanumanth...
Journalists Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. G. Sujatha and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD400
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner-society challenges (he order, dated 30-7-1999 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, 2nd respondent in ARC No. 52 of 1998, affirmed by the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal, 3rd respondent, through its order, dated 29-9-2004 in CTA No. 209 of 1999.2. The petitioner is a society registered under the provisions of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act (for short 'the Act'). The membership is restricted to journalists and its object is to provide house sites to its members. The 1st respondent was admitted as member of the society in the year 1990. According to her, on the demand made by the petitioner-society, she paid a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as tentative advance on 10-5-1994 for allotment of a plot. Complaining that she was not allotted the plot, in spite of requests, she raised a dispute before the 2nd respondent, under Section 61 of the Act, being ARC No. 52 of 1998. Through his order dated 30-7-1999, the 2nd respondent directed the p...
Meesala Muralidhar Vs. Government of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD572
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The short but oft vexed question which falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether the arms of the expression 'displaced person' can be stretched too far so as to engulf in its fold persons who had lost just a tiny piece of land in the large extent owned by the family not affecting the principal means of livelihood of the family dependent on such agriculture and not having nexus to the said acquisition of land for the purpose of a Project or the like purposes. Quite often both Central and the State Governments have been adopting this mode of consideration of cases in the case of public employment under the category of displaced persons quota which is akin to the reservation quotas affecting the right of equal opportunity to public employment which has been enshrined by our Constitution.2. The writ petitioner filed the present writ petition questioning the order dated 24-11-2000 made in OA No. 5531/2000 on the file of A.P. Administrative Tribunal, in sho...
Ch. Prasanth Kumar Vs. Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-09-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALD(Cri)530; 2005(3)ALT635; 2005CriLJ3773
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in altering the provision of law indicated in FIR No. 150 of 2004 of Atmakur P.S., Nellore District, from Section 174 Cr.P.C. to Section 306 IPC, is illegal and arbitrary. A consequential direction is sought for alteration of the provision to Section 302 IPC.2. The petitioner states that his sister, by name B. Vidhyadhari was married to the 4th respondent. It is alleged that she was ill-treated and harassed by the 4th respondent. It is stated that on 3-12-2004, Vidyadhari hanged herself with a saree and died. FIR No. 150 of 2004 was registered on 3-12-2004. The provision of law indicated therein is Section 174 Cr.P.C. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent committed the murder. He states that during the course of investigation, he made a complaint to the effect that the 4th respondent killed the deceased Vidhyadhari and that it is not a case of suicide. The...
Rajoji and anr. Vs. Patnam Hanmanth Reddy and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD23
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the concurrent judgments passed in A.S. No. 32 of 1992 on the file of the learned District Judge, Mahboobnagar and O.S. No. 51 of 1985 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Shadnagar.2. The plaintiffs in the suit are the appellants herein. According to them, they purchased an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas each, partly in Survey No. 323/A and partly in Survey No. 326/A of Pomalpally Village, Shadnagar Taluk, through sale deeds, dated 7-9-1977 (Exs.A1 and A2). They pleaded that an unregistered sale deed (Ex.A.1), dated 11-5-1972, was executed by the vendor, Sri Ramji, S/o. Buddoji, before Ex.A.2 and A.3. The 1st respondent, on the other hand, pleaded that he purchased an extent of Ac.1.19 guntas in the same survey numbers from the same owner, through the sale deed, dated 14-11-1973 (Ex.B.1). The appellants filed the suit for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The 1st respondent, in tur...
K. Lakshmi Vs. Sri Saraswathi Grameena Bank and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ALT717
ORDERB. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri G. Rama Gopal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri K. Gopala Krishna Murthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent.2. The petitioner, who had been working with the respondents 1 and 2 herein, as a Manager, filed this writ petition, inter alia, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus challenging the validity of Rule 10 (2) of Sri Saraswathi Grammena Bank (Staff) Service Regulations, 1983 (for short, 'the Regulation, 1983'), as unconstitutional and vioiative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and also to declare the impugned order dated 1-9-1998 as bad, illegal and arbitrary and opposed to the principles of natural justice and consequently for a direction to reinstate her with full back wages and continuity of service with all other attendant benefits.3. Though initially, a challenge was sought to be made against the validity o...
M. Madhava Reddy Vs. Vice-chairman and Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALT434
ORDERJ. Chelameswar, J.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 11 -2-2005 passed in W.P. No. 24531 of 2004, the unsuccessful petitioner therein, who is the appellant herein, preferred this appeal.2. The appellant is working with the respondent Corporation as Field Man in Civil Engineering Department, H.R. Division, Sangareddy, Medak District. By the impugned order in the writ petition, the appellant is sought to be transferred to Nalgonda. Aggrieved by the same he preferred departmental appeal to the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent in his order dated 18-12-2004 confirmed the order of 3rd respondent, and therefore, the above mentioned writ petition came to be filed. The learned single Judge by the impugned order was pleased to dismiss the writ petition.3. We do not see any reason to interfere with the order under appeal. However, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is having school going children and their examinations are scheduled to be held in the month...
Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Vs. Iqbal Ahmad and a ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ALD594; (2005)IIILLJ186AP
P.S. Narayana, J.1. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, filed the present writ petition praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 24.9.2004 passed by A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in O.A.No. 2779 of 2003 and quash the same and pass such other suitable orders.2. It is stated that the 1st respondent-applicant in the OA was placed under suspension by the Government of Andhra Pradesh by virtue of G.O. Ms. No. 530, Municipal Administration, dated 1.9.1989 pending enquiry into the allegations of issuing sanction plan and contravention of Building Regulations when he was working as Town Planning Supervisor in Circle No. 3 of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. It is stated that by virtue of G.O. Ms. No. 530, dated 11.9.1989, 2nd respondent herein while deciding to initiate disciplinary proceedings, appointed Sri H....