Andhra Pradesh Court August 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.
Syed Jaweed Hussaini and anr. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD783
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the leasing of private land of an extent of Ac. 18.00 gts. situated in Survey No. 28 of Miyapur Village of Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District to the 4th respondent without acquiring under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act by G.O.Ms. No. 340, M.A. & U.D. Department dated 8.7.2003 as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, mala fide and pass such other suitable orders.2. The third and fifth respondents filed counter-affidavits and a reply affidavit was also filed.3. Sri Syed Shareef Ahmed, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners had taken this Court through the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The facts and events commencing from the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 6-7-1967, Section 5A enquiry dated 24-10-1969 and Section 6 declaration dated 16.4.1970 and Section 9(3) and Section 10 notices dated 25.2....
M.V.S. Suryanarayana Raju Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: (2009)20VST214(AP)
ORDERJ. Chelameswar, J.1. The writ petition is filed with the prayer as follows:This honourable court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the third respondent in cancelling the public auction conducted and held in favour of the petitioner on December 29, 2005 in respect of the company guest house of the fourth respondent situated at Pithapuram, East Godavari District for recovery of the arrears of sales tax as illegal, arbitrary, high handedness and contrary to Section 37A of the Revenue Recovery Act and set aside the same and direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to confirm the sale in favour of the petitioner and register the auctioned property in favour of the petitioner.2. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition are that, the fourth respondent fell in arrears of tax due under, the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, 'the APGST Act'). For recovery of th...
Abdul Irfan Amoodi Vs. the A.P.Housing Board, Rep by Its Chairman and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALD750; 2006(5)ALT804
G.S. Singhvi, C.J.1. Whether offer made by the then Vice-Chairman of the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (for short 'the Board') to the appellant for sale of 68.19 square yards of the Board's land situated in Afzal Gunj, Hyderabad, which was unauthorisedly occupied by him can be enforced by issue of a writ of mandamus is the question which arises for determination in this appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent for setting aside order dated 25.1.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 28064 of 2005. 2. The appellant is unauthorisedly occupying the land in question and has raised some construction over it. By taking advantage of communication dated 01.09.2003 sent by the then Vice-Chairman of the Board-cum-Housing Commissioner proposing to sell the land in question to the appellant at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per square yard, the latter filed Writ Petition No. 28064 of 2005 with the prayer that the Board and its functionaries may be directed to sell the land in ...
Jonnalagadda Samrajyam and ors. Vs. Registrar, the Special Court Const ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD176; 2006(5)ALT690
ORDERT. Ch. Surya Rao, J.1. Inasmuch as common questions of law and fact are involved and as all these Writ Petitions emanate from an order, dated 10-8-2001, in LG.A. No. 11 of 1998, on the file of the learned Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, for short, 'the Act', they can be disposed of together.2. In this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners seek a Writ of Certiorari to quash the judgment of the Special Court-referred to hereinabove.3. A concise statement of facts need be stated for brevity and better understanding of the matter thus:The second respondent herein, which is known as Telaga Mahajana Sangham, Vijayawada, is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The said society through its Secretary filed an application in LG.O.P. No. 138 of 1984 before the Special Tribunal, Krishna at Machilipatnam, against the writ petitioners and others. The land in dispute, which is an extent of 1.87 cents, was part of larger extent of 4.87 ...
Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad Vs. Smt. B. Varalakshmi and or ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(5)ALT716
ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in O.A. No. 4459 of 2005 dated 24-10-2004, as being contrary to the provisions of Rule 46 of A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980, and seeking a consequential declaration that the 1sl respondent was entitled only for interest on delayed payment of gratuity as contemplated under the Rules, the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, is before this Court.2. Facts, to the extent, necessary, are that the respondent herein retired as a Village Development Officer on 30-6-2000 on attaining the age of superannuation. She submitted her pension papers on 27-06-2000 for onward transmission to the Accountant General. Earlier, while she was in service, the District Collector issued a charge memo in April 1998 making certain allegations against her. The respondent-application submitted her written statement, dated 12-5-1998, denying the charges. A second memo was issued on 29-12-1999 to which the respondent-applicant submitted her ex...
Andhra Kesari College of Education and ors. Vs. State of A.P. and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD290
G.V. Seethapathy, J. 1. By this order, we are disposing of a batch of writ appeals filed against order dated 19.4.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby he dismissed Writ Petition Nos. 5750, 6162 and 8348 of 2005 filed for quashing G.O. Ms. No. 57, School Education (Training-Al) Department, dated 21.3.2005(for brevity the 'G.O.'). We are also disposing Writ Petition Nos. 8114, 8134, 8280, 8288, 8371, 9066, 9562, 9974, 9982, 10898 and 12146 of 2005 in which legality of the G.O. has been questioned.2. For admission of the students into B.Ed. Courses in aided and unaided Minority Colleges of Education, the State Government prescribed the procedure vide Rules circulated through G.O. Rt. No. 169, Education (SE.TRG.I) Department, dated 5.2.2004. As per Rule 4(ii), the Managements of unaided Minority Colleges were required to admit the candidates to the extent of 85% of intake belonging to concerned minority community, who were eligible and qualified in Ed-CET-2003 or Common Entrance...
M.A. Ahad Qureshi Vs. Commissioner of Police
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD350
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. The petitioner assails the order of the respondent bearing Reference No. HS6/Arms/393/2006 dated 29-5-2006 rejecting the petitioner's request/application for grant of an arms licence. The order of rejection reads as under:You have applied for the grant of arms licence to possess one NP bore Revolver/ Pistol for self protection.Your request for grant of arms licence to possess one NP bore Revolver/Pistol is examined in detailed (sic! detail) and Rejected.2. The respondent is exercising a statutory power. The power must be exercised (positively or negatively) on objective evaluation of facts. Statutory power and discretion is conferred not for the pleasure of the incumbent of a public office, but for effectuation of a public purpose. Recording of reasons for the exercise of discretion in a particular manner is a sine qua non for the valid exercise of public power. This principle is too well settled. This settled principle of law has been transgressed by the respo...
Syed SamiuddIn Hashmi @ Sama Vs. Regional Passport Officer and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ALD377
ORDERG. Rohini, J.1. The petitioner claims to be a permanent resident of Hyderabad. It is stated that he was married to one Mohamooda Fatima on 23-8-1998, however in view of certain serious disputes arose between them, he pronounced divorce on 15-11-2000 as per Muslim Personal Law.2. It appears that thereafter the wife of the petitioner made a complaint under the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and on the basis of the same Crime No. 25/2001 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 498A and 404 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. That apart, the petitioner's wife filed W.P.No.4212 of 2004 questioning the action of the police in not investigating into the complaint made by her. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 15-7-2004. The operative portion of the said order may be extracted hereunder:In view of the fact that a case is registered against the third respondent, the official respondents are directed to take appropriate steps ei...
D. Radha Vs. Government of A.P., Higher Education Department and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALT183
D.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard both sides.2. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to regularize her services as Junior Assistant in the Hindi Maha Vidyalaya College of Arts, Commerce and Science, Nallakunta, Hyderabad, and pay regular salary and all other allowances due to her in the Government scales of pay from the date of her appointment and release grant-in-aid to the post of the petitioner, or in the alternative to direct the respondents to absorb the petitioner in the post of Store Keeper in the said College.3. Factual background, in brief, appears to be that the petitioner was employed in the 3rd respondent College as Junior Assistant in the year 1992, on temporary and daily-wage basis, on a consolidated remuneration by the management. Even as on today, she claims that she has been continuing as such. She sought for regularization of her services in view of the long service rendered by her in the 3rd respondent College. She claims to have made a representation to the Co...
C. Venkat Rami Reddy and ors. Vs. Vice-chairman, Hyderabad Urban Devel ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: 2006(6)ALD411; 2006(6)ALT699
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard Sri Malla Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioners, Sri T. Niranjan Reddy, Sri Polisetti Radhakrishna and Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the respondents.2. Sri Malla Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioners had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and the respective stands taken in the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents 1, 2, 3 to 5 and would contend that in the facts and circumstances of the case without putting the writ petitioners on notice and without giving any opportunity and without following the procedure granting permission to respondents 3 to 5 for construction of building in the subject-matter of the writ petition being contrary to the provisions of A.P. Municipalities Act 1965 and also in violation of principles of natural justice, the same cannot be sustained.3. Per contra Sri T. Niranjan Reddy, the learned Cou...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »