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.
St. Mary's College of Engineering and Technology Vs. Government of A.P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD182; 2006(2)ALT277
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is a private engineering college. On an earlier occasion, the petitioner, along with other engineering colleges, approached this Court by filing W.P.No. 23481 of 2005 and Batch. The context in which the writ petitions came to be filed was as under:2. The All India Council for Technical Education, fourth respondent herein, permitted, what is known as 'lateral entry', in the engineering courses. Under this scheme all the candidates, who have obtained diploma degrees, in the engineering subjects, can appear in the entrance examination called E-CET, conducted for the purpose of making admissions to II year of the engineering courses. For the current academic year all the candidates who have qualified themselves in the E-CET have been admitted into the second year of the engineering courses in one college or the other. Still there remain vast number vacant seats in second year course. Drawing analogy from the course of action adopted by the Supre...
M. Sheelamma (Died) by Lrs and ors. Vs. B. Alibert and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: AIR2006AP209; 2006(2)ALD574
ORDERA. Gopal Reddy, J.1. The petitioners - judgment-debtors filed this revision questioning the correctness of the Order dated 29-3-2005 passed by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool in E.P.No. 508 of 2004 in O.S. No. 19 of 1993.2. In spite of service of notice on the respondents, none appears. Hence they are set ex parte. Initially, the respondents -decree holders filed the suit O.S.No. 19 of 1993 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool for declaration of title and for possession which was dismissed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, A.S.No. 90 of 1998 was filed by them before the learned III Additional District Judge, Kurnool and the same was allowed in part decreeing the suit for possession on the decree holders depositing Rs. 15,000/- within one month from the date of the decree i.e., 28-2-2000. On such deposit, the petitioners - judgment-debtors were directed to handover the possession to the respondents - decree holders within three...
Prof and Dr. D. Venkayya Chowdary Vs. Paruchisti R. Katrak
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ALD173; 2006(2)ALT456
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. C.M.A. No. 2770 of 1999 and C.M.A. No. 2771 of 1999 are directed against the common order and decrees, dated 30-7-1999, in O.P. No. 134 of 1996 and O.P. No. 140 of 1996, respectively, passed by the I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad.3. O.P. No. 11 of 1999 is filed before this Court by the petitioner in O.P. No. 134 of 1996 against the appellant in C.M.A. Nos. 2770 and 2771 of 1999.4. The respondent in O.P. No. 134 of 1996 and the petitioner in O.P. No. 140 of 1996 is the appellant herein, the petitioner in O.P. No. 134 of 1996 and Respondent No. 1 in O.P. No. 140 of 1996 is the respondent herein, while the petitioner and respondent in O.P. No. 11 of 1999 are the appellant and respondent, respectively, in the said civil miscellaneous appeals.5. O.P. No. 134 of 1996 was filed under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for brevity 'the Act'), O.P No. 140 of 1996 was filed under Sections 213 and 276 of the Act while O....
Jamia Masjid, Masjid Hazarath Bilal Vs. Station House Officer, Sub-ins ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD702
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. This is an appeal for setting aside ex parte interim order dated 30-11-2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPMP No. 32809 of 2005 (Writ Petition No. 25513 of 2005) whereby he directed respondent No. 1-Station House Officer-cum-Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station Nacharam, Ranga Reddy District, to render necessary protection in view of the representation made by the writ petitioner (respondent No. 4).2. In the writ petition filed by it under Article 226 of the Constitution, respondent No. 4 has prayed for grant of a declaration that failure of respondent No. 1 to provide necessary help to it to proceed with the construction and to protect its possession and enjoyment over land comprised in Survey Nos. 208/1 and 206/1 (in part) admeasuring 1072 square yards situated at Nacharam Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District is violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution. Respondent No. 4 has also prayed for issuance of a direction to respondent ...
Kalagara Vighneswararao Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ALD683
ORDERR. Subhash Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed, questioning the order of the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 68, Social Welfare (LTR.1) Department, dated 30-7-2001, by which, it has confirmed the order of eviction passed by the Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Eluru, in S.R.No.26/78, dated 29-9-1978, in exercise of powers under the A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation 1 of 1959 (for short 'the Regulation 1/1959'), as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970.2. It is the case of the petitioner, that he is the owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.9.05 guntas, situated in R.S.No.637 of Buttaigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District. It is stated, that his late father had purchased the land in question from one Smt. Gundumogula Kusumamba, w/o Laxmanrao, initially by agreement of sale dated 2-5-1969, and, thereafter, obtained registered sale deed in the year 1975.3. The Special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Eluru, basing on the report sent by the Special De...
Potina Ramu Vs. P. Siva Prasad and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: II(2006)ACC144; 2007ACJ1969; 2006(2)ALD659; 2006(3)ALT186
G. Chandraiah, J.1. Heard the Counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents.2. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vizianagaram in M.O.P.No.29/1999, the claimant preferred this appeal.3. The brief facts of the case are that the claimant was aged 30 years and earning an amount of Rs. 80/- per day by working as labourer for loading and unloading works. On 5-6-1998 the claimant attended to his duties on the lorry bearing No. AP 31 V 658 and after unloading the stick at Visakhapatnam, was returning back to get another load from Nandigam and that when the lorry reached near Zoo Park, due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry, it hit a tractor stationed on the left side of the road and as a result, the claimant sustained fracture of both the bones of right arm, 6th rib and grievous injury on stomach and other injuries. Immediately, he was taken to the K.G. Hospital, for treatment. T...
G. Mallaiah Vs. Apsrtc and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD851
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner is employed as driver in APSRTC. A charge-sheet was issued to him, on 28.1.1994, alleging that he drove the bus on 22.11.1993, in a rash and negligent manner, causing an accident, in which a pillion rider of a two-wheeler died. He was also placed under suspension on 28.1.1994. Departmental enquiry was conducted by a Committee, comprising of two officials of the APSRTC, and a report was submitted on 27.1.1994. The petitioner was issued a show-cause notice, dated 1.7.1994, directing him to explain as to why the punishment of removal from service, shall not be imposed on him. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 13996 of 1994. A criminal case in C.C. No. 189 of 1999, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Miryalaguda, was also pending against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the writ petition was disposed of on 25.10.1995, setting aside the show-cause notice, leaving it open to the Corporation, to resume t...
Sayam Venkata Ganesh Vs. District Collector and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD854
ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner challenges the show-cause notice dated 27.12.2005 issued by the District Collector, Visakhapatnam, first respondent herein.2. The father of the petitioner belongs to Kapu community and his mother belongs to Scheduled Tribe. On the strength of the Government Orders issued from time to time, the petitioner claimed and secured the benefit of being declared as a Scheduled Tribe. He has been appointed as a Horticulture Officer in the Department of Horticulture, Government of Andhra Pradesh. Complaints were received by the first respondent from the associations of SC & ST employees to the effect that the petitioner does not belong to Scheduled Tribe and that he is deriving several benefits, meant for such Community. On receipt of the same, the first respondent conducted a preliminary enquiry and thereafter referred the matter to the District Level Scrutiny Committee, second respondent herein. The committee, in turn, submitted its report on 7.11.20...
Sanicons and anr. Vs. Government of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: AIR2006AP282; 2006(2)ALD138; IV(2006)BC232; 2007(2)CTLJ128(AP)
G. Rohini, J.1. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondentsinvoking the Bank Guarantees furnished by the 1st petitioner along with its tenders in response to the tender notification dated 5.3.2002.2. The 1st petitioner claims to be a registered special class Contractor with the department of the Roads and Buildings. The 1st respondent-Superintending engineer (R&B;), APHM & ECRP, issued a tender notification inviting tenders for widening and strengthening of Mydukur to Tadichearla Road from KM 50/0 to 57/0 and KM 57/0 to 65/0 under Package Nos.28-C and 28-D respectively. The 1st petitioner submitted its tenders, furnishing the required security as specified in Clause 16.1 of the Instructions to Bidders (ITB), by way of two Demand Drafts i.e., BG.No.2002/0015 for Rs.2,92,000/- and BG.No.2002/0016 for Rs.3,34,000/- issued by the Andhra Bank, Nandyal, respectively, in respect of the above said two packages. It is not in dispute that as per the tender schedule, bi...
Khaja RaheemuddIn Vs. Divisional Forest Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ALD844
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. The petitioner is proprietor of M/s. Rahimuddin and brothers Saw Mill, Dharmapuri in Karimnagar District. His father established the said saw mill statedly in 1976 after obtaining a licence from the first respondent as required under A.P. Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1969 (hereafter called the Rules, for brevity). After the demise of the father, the petitioner has been running the saw mill. It appears the second respondent herein having received some anonymous information on 13.5.2005 regarding misuse of permits by the petitioner, inspected the petitioner's saw mill on 15.5.2005 along with special party staff. The second respondent collected six original permits and verified the same with reference to the records of the office of the second respondent. He allegedly found variations in the quantities. Therefore, on the same day, the second respondent seized the petitioner's saw mill and submitted a report on 18.5.2005 to the first respondent. The latter having com...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »