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.
K. Karunakar Vs. Apsrtc and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD353; 2006(2)ALT177
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. This writ petition raises a question of general importance, in the field of adjudication, under the Industrial Disputes Act (for short 'the Act').2. The petitioner is employed as a Driver in the A.P.S.R.T.C. On 15-5-1997, he was entrusted with the duty of driving a Bus, on the route from Hyderabad to Amarachinta. At 11:15 p.m., on that day, an accident took place, involving the Bus, driven by the petitioner, and a bullock cart; resulting the death of one person and a bullock. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, by the Corporation. Simultaneously, the petitioner was tried for an offence under Section 304A of I.P.C.3. In the departmental enquiry, petitioner was found guilty of misconduct. The 3rd respondent passed an order dated 27-10-1997, removing the petitioner from service. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent. On 12-12-1997, the 2nd respondent allowed the appeal, in part; set aside the or...
M.D. Soujanya and anr. Vs. S.V.V.P.V.M.C. Mahila Vidya Peeth and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD251; 2006(3)ALT394
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners question the action of respondents 2 and 3 in not admitting the posts, held by them, to grant-in-aid in terms of the provisions of the A.P. Private Educational Institutions Grant-in-aid (Regulations) Act, 1988 and seek consequential directions to the respondents to admit the said posts to grant-in-aid and for a further direction to the 1st respondent to pay their salary, as per the scales applicable to aided Lecturers, with effect from 21.7.1993, the date of their regular appointment, till such time the posts are admitted to grant-in-aid.2. Facts, to the extent necessary for this writ petition, are that the 1st petitioner, an M.Sc. in Zoology from Andhra University, and the 2nd petitioner, an M.Sc, in Physics and an M. Phil, possessed the qualifications and were eligible to be appointed as Lecturers in degree colleges. The 1st respondent, an aided private college, established by Sri Venkateswara Vidya Peeth, was grant...
Reliance Granite Private Ltd. Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: AIR2006AP292; 2006(2)ALD237
ORDERB. Seshasayana Reddy, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by M/s. Reliance Granite Private Limited with a prayer to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of 1st respondent culminating in issue of Memo No. 11709/ M.II(1)/04-3, dated 7.3.2005 on an application dated 18.8.2004 presented by M/s. Exotic Granite Exports-3rd respondent and to quash the order passed therein.2. The background facts of the case leading to filing of this writ petition, in brief, are :The petitioner is a private limited company. It is engaged in procuring granites and process the same in the factory for the purpose of exports. The petitioner obtained a quarry lease for black granite over an extent of 2 hectares of land in S.No.204/1 of Ingurthy Village of Kesamudram Mandal, Warangal for a period of five years. When the forest department started interfering with the quarrying operations of the petitioner-company claiming that the land forms part of the reserved forest, the petitioner filed W.P....
Kilarapu Satyavati and ors. Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD342
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the notification issued under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity), the three petitioners filed the instant writ petition seeking invalidation of the impugned notification. By the notification dated 18.11.2005, the District Collector, East Godavari District proposed to acquire the land admeasuring Acs.3.05 in survey Nos.218/3, 218/4 and 219/2 situated at Ramachandrapuram in East Godavari District. The land was sought to be acquired for establishment of compost yard to Ramachandrapuram Municipality. The said notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was followed by a declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act, which was published on 23.11.2005. Both these notifications are assailed in this writ petition. Be it noted while issuing notification under Section 6(1) of the Act, the first respondent dispensed with enquiry under Section 5A of the Act.2. The petitioners claim that the land in survey Nos.218/3 and 218/4 orig...
Subash Neemkar and ors. Vs. Regional Joint Commissioner of Endowments ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD301
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Heard Sri M Vidyasagar, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, Sri E, Ayyapu Reddy, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V. Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned Counsel for the 4th respondent and Sri K. Ravi, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the 5th respondent and at their request the writ petition was taken up for final hearing.2. The present writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings of the 1st respondent in R.P.No.1024 of 2004 dated 5.10.2004, upholding the order of the 2nd respondent in LA. No.79/04 in O.A.No.21/ 04, dated 18.8.2004, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and for a direction to quash both the orders.3. Facts, to the extent necessary for this writ petition, are that petitioners 1 to 6 claim to be the founder trustees of the subject institution - a Hanuman Temple constructed in the year 1984. The said institution, said to have sev...
Valluri Anuradha Vs. Sub-registrar and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD371
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The Writ Petition No.484 of 2006 is filed by three petitioners. The first petitioner is mother of petitioners 2 and 3. The second petitioner in this writ petition filed another writ petition separately being W.P. No.483 of 2006. The mother and two daughters filed the writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 3 in executing the cancellation deed bearing document No.6330/2005, dated 22.12.2005 as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential order restraining the respondents from alienating, transferring and conveying the house bearing No. 13-54/1, plot No. 14, Survey No.221, situated at P&T; Colony, Gaddiannaram village (hereafter called, 'the house'). The second writ petition being W.P.No.483 of 2006 is filed for a similar relief in respect of another cancellation deed bearing document No.6329/ 2005, dated 22.12.2005, executed by third respondent. Be it noted, the respondents in both the writ petitions are same and the ...
Narimeti Mukesh @ Muthaiah and anr. Vs. A.P. Forest Development Corpor ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALT188
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. In these two writ petitions, the procedure adopted by the A.P. Forest Development Corporation Limited, the respondent herein, in the matter of selection, to the post of Assistant Personnel Officer (APO), is in challenge.2. The respondent is a Government Company, incorporated with an object of developing Forest in the State of Andhra Pradesh. It has various categories of employees, ranging from General Manager to Watchman-cum-Sweeper (26 categories), on the administrative side, and Group Manager, to Fieldman, on technical side. The post of Personnel Officer occurs at Sl.No. 5, in the administrative side. The post of Manager in the Head office, was upgraded to that of A.P.O., through Standing Order No. 190 of 1982, dated 6-10-1982. Through the same Standing Order, the method of appointment to that post was also indicated. It was to be filled, by deputation of candidates from Government or other organization, or by internal promotion, from the categories of P.S. t...
Meher Fatima Vs. District Collector and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD440
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is statedly the owner of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.0.22 guntas in Survey No. 26 of Chandanagar Village of Serilingampally Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. She purchased the said property from V.C. Veeraiah and his three sons under registered sale deed, dated 28.1.1998 and rectification deed dated 21.11.2000. According to the petitioner, the main approach road to the said land is through Survey No. 27, which is a Government land and there is a 40 feet wide road formed through Government land in Survey No. 27. On North, East and West sides of the petitioner's property, private lands are situated and therefore the alleged road in Survey No. 27 is the only approach providing ingress and egress to the petitioner. The petitioner alleges that there was such road for more than fifty years as per the revenue records showing it as public road/public street maintained by Serilingampally Municipality, the third respondent herein.2. The petitioner further...
Darisi Masthanamma Vs. Mandiga Rama Krishna
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: AIR2006AP286; 2006(2)ALD534
S. Ananda Reddy, J.1. This second appeal is at the instance of the second defendant, aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Court of District Judge, Nellore, in A.S. No. 95 of 1988, dated 21-4-1993 by which the judgment and decree passed by the Court of Principal District Munsif, Nellore, in O.S. No. 819 of 1983, dated 5-9-1988 dismissing (sic decreeing) the suit was confirmed.2. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit seeking for cancellation of the sale deed dated 26-3-1980 executed by the first defendant in favour of the second defendant as illegal and invalid, and the first defendant has no right or authority to execute such sale deed. According to the respondent/ plaintiff, the suit schedule property belongs to his maternal grandfather Bomma Suryanarayana, who purchased the same out of his own money along with some other property and obtained a registered sale deed in the name of his wife Bomma Narsamma in the year 1941. Later even during the lifetime of his wife B. Na...
Ayesha Fathima Vs. A.P. State Minorities Finance Corporation and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD252
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is the wife of the 2nd respondent, who, in turn, is employed with the 1st respondent-Corporation. The petitioner states that the 2nd respondent has been harassing her, and vexed with that, she submitted a complaint before P.S. Pahadishareef, Ranga Reddy, which was registered as Crime No. 174 of 2005 under Section 498-A I.P.C. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 1st respondent did not take suitable action against the 2nd respondent, in terms of Rule 20 of the Service Rules (for short 'the Rules') applicable to the 1st respondent. She claims to have made a representation, dated 26.12.2005, to the 1st respondent, and alleges that no action has been taken thereon.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 1st respondent did not take any steps against the 2nd respondent, though Crime No. 1...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »