Andhra Pradesh Court January 2006 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.
Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), Apseb and anr. Vs. T. Pall ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD550; [2006(109)FLR478]
ORDERN.V. Ramana, J.1. The award dated 26.10.1999, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Guntur, in I.D. No. 49 of 1993, directing the petitioners to reinstate respondent No. 1 into service, is challenged in this writ petition.2. Respondent No. 1 worked as Helper in the Office of petitioner No. 1, namely Divisional Electrical Engineer, Operations, A.P.S.E.B., Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. On the ground that respondent No. 1 collected illegal gratification of Rs. 950/-from one K.V. Narasimha Rao and cheated the consumer, petitioner No. 1 appointed the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operations, Bhimavaram, as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the allegations. The Enquiry Officer, having gone into the allegations, issued charge-sheet to respondent No. 1 on 27.11.1990. Denying the allegations made in the charge-sheet, respondent No. 1 submitted his explanation. Considering the explanation, the Enquiry Officer, fixed 14.5.1991 as the date of enquiry, and communicated the same t...
Addagatla Narendar Vs. Some Vijayalakshmi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD94; 2006(3)ALT422
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Krishna Reddy, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Hari Prasad, Counsel representing the respondent.2. The revision petitioner filed the CRP questioning the order made in IA No. 2815 of 2002 in OS No. 347 of 1990 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. The defendant in the said suit moved the aforesaid application under Order XVI Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure for summoning the witnesses, whose description had been furnished, to establish the execution of the document and also the aspect of possession. The said application was resisted and ultimately, the application was dismissed mainly on the ground that this Court while disposing of CRP No. 5779 of 2002 observed that if the petitioner filed list of witnesses only he will be entitled to examine further witnesses on his behalf, otherwise, he is not entitled to examine further witnesses in case IA No. 2526 of 2002 being allowed. This observatio...
B. Satyanarayana and anr. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Endowments and an ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)ALT214
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The facts of this case disclose the manner in which, the temples in the State of Andhra Pradesh, are subjected to mal-administration and their limited resources are squeezed by the interested persons, particularly, the so-called secular employees. A stage has come when the survival of the temples, is made to depend upon the mercy of such employees.2. Sri Venkateswara Swami Temple, Karimnagar Town, had the cadre strength of one Junior Assistant, one night Watchman and one Attender. The Commissioner of Endowments Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, is the competent authority to fix and revise the cadre strength of different categories of posts in the temples, depending upon their income and necessity.3. Though there exists only one post of Junior Assistant, the petitioners herein, who are the employees of other temples in the District, got themselves transferred to Sri Venkateshwara Swami Temple, Karimnagar, about ten years back. All the three Junior Assi...
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Dora Plastics (Pvt.) Ltd.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2006
Reported in: [2006]147STC683(AP)
ORDERBilal Nazki, J.1. This revision has been filed against an order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The controversy before the Tribunal was whether plastic cups and tumblers would fall within entry No. 19 of the First Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act') or would fall within entry No. 187 of the First Schedule to the Act. In the Tribunal's view, these items were basically containers and as such, they would fall within entry 19 of the First Schedule to the Act. The Tribunal relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in G. Claridge & Company Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise : 1991ECR433(SC) by which the Supreme Court held that egg trays fall within the meaning of expression of 'container'. In this view of the matter, we do not think there is any scope for revising the order passed by the Tribunal.2. The tax revision case is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed....
Mukhtiar Singh Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-31-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC9; 2007ACJ1137
K.C. Bhanu, J.1. Challenging the judgment dated 29.5.2002 in Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2001 on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, the present revision case is filed.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.1.1998 at about 5.30 p.m., while the deceased was proceeding on a scooter to Vizianagaram, another scooter driven by PW 9 came in opposite direction and dashed him and as a result, he fell down and it is at this time, revision petitioner who was driving the truck bearing No. ADJ 9062 while overtaking a lorry, dashed against him and as a result the deceased died on the spot. Basing on the report given by PW 1, police registered the case, investigated into and after completion of investigation, filed charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 304-A, Indian Penal Code.3. To substantiate the case of prosecution, 13 witnesses PWs 1 to 13 were examined and got marked 7 documents Exhs. P1 to P7. Exh. Dl is marked on behalf of the defence. Accepting th...
A. Peddanna Vs. Divisional Security Commissioner, Railway Protection F ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-30-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD560; 2006(4)ALT631; [2006(109)FLR784]
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is working as Head Constable in the Railway Protection Force (RPF), in the Guntakal Division. He filed this writ petition for issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against him, vide Memo dated 21.9.2005, issued by the respondent herein, as arbitrary and illegal. The facts that gave raise to the filing of this writ petition, are as under:2. The Station House Officer, Narpala Police Station of Anantapur District, registered Crime No. 44 of 2001 against the petitioner, alleging that he has abused the Daliths, named in the First Information Report, with reference to their caste, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act'). The same has been taken up as P.R.C. No. 154 of 2001 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Anantapur.3. Alleging that the petitioner did...
Dandu Trinadha Raju and ors. Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALT9
Bilal Nazki, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the writ petitioners against the order dt. 30-8-2005 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court who dismissed the writ petition being W.P, No. 18880 of 2005.2. The writ petition was filed challenging the notifications under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') and the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto by the State Government as illegal, arbitrary and unjust. The writ petitioners, who are 23 in number, contended that they had purchased house plots in Sy, No. 98/1 -A of Pedagantyada village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam. Each petitioner was in possession and enjoyment of the house plots ranging from an extent of 267 sq. yards to 366 sq. yards except 9th petitioner who possesses a house plot of 672 sq. yards. The petitioner who filed the affidavit on behalf of other petitioners is the 1st petitioner. It is curious to note that he owns 4 house plots in the area and petitioners 4 and 8 also possess 4 house pl...
Manaksia Limited and ors. Vs. Inspector, Legal Metrology, Weights and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALT325
Bilal Nazki, J.1. These two writ appeals are being heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment, as they raise common questions of law and fact.2. The learned Single Judge has passed two different orders in two different writ petitions on 29th of August, 2005. Writ Appeal No. 1819 of 2005 arises out of orders in Writ Petition No. 18662 of 2005, whereas Writ Appeal No. 2140 of 2005 arises out of orders in Writ Petition No. 18663 of 2005.3. The facts of Writ Petition No. 18663 of 2005 are as under-On 16th of October 2000, a show cause notice was issued by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner, who was a manufacturer and retail dealer in consumer care hygiene products, to compound the offence under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SWM Act'). Notice was replied to by the petitioner on 16th of November 2000. Respondent No. 2 was not satisfied with the reply and he filed a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate,...
G. Raghava Reddy Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD376; 2006(2)ALT440
Bilal Nazki, J.1. This writ petition and writ appeal raise same questions of law and fact and therefore, are being disposed of together.2. G.O. Ms. No.911, dated 14.12.2000 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, is the subject-matter of Writ Petition No.8063 of 2004 and is challenged in the writ petition. Same G.O. was challenged in Writ Petition No.2563 of 2002. That writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. Writ Appeal No.1035 of 2004 has been filed against that judgment of the learned Single Judge.3. By G.O. Ms. No.911, dated 14.12.2000, the Government allowed sale of land belonging to 'Sri Bhavanarayanaswamy Temple', Ponnur, in favour of A.P.N.G.O's Association, Ponnur, by private negotiations under Section 80(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The price per acre was fixed at rupees four lakhs. The order stated that the transaction would be benef...
Government of A.P. and ors. Vs. V. Lingamma and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD507
Bilal Nazki, J 1. These two appeals have been filed against a common order passed in Writ Petition Nos. 26301 and 25967 of 2003. Petitioners claimed that one Shaheen Aziz Ahmed was allotted a plot measuring Ac.2-30 guntas in Plot No. 10 of erstwhile Jubilee Hills Municipality.2.Writ Petition No. 25967 of 2003 was filed seeking a direction that respondents should not interfere with the petitioners' right over their property measuring Ac.2-30 guntas in Plot No. 10 co-related to T.S.No. 4/2, Block-G, Ward No. 10, Road No. 10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. When the writ petition came up for hearing, the Court was informed by the learned Government Pleader on 16.12.2003 that the District Collector, Hyderabad had passed an order on 5.12.2003 under A.P. Escheats and Bona Vacantia Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and the same had been sent for publication. Thereafter, it appears, another writ petition was filed being Writ Petition No. 26301 of 2003. In this writ petition, relief c...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »