Andhra Pradesh Court October 2008 Judgments

Shamlal Tiwari Vs. Najmunnisa Begum @ Zainabunnisa Begum,

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT303

ORDERVilas V. Afzulpurkar, J.1. Both these revision petitions are preferred against the order dated 16.12.2004 passed by the Appellate Authority (Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court), Hyderabad in R.A. No. 87 of 2002. The tenant, aggrieved by the order of learned Rent Controller directing eviction on the ground of wilful default, and confirmed by the lower appellate authority, is in revision before this Court being CRP No. 1131 of 2005. The landladies filed CRP No. 5759 of 2005 against the order of the lower appellate authority in so far as it held the ground of tenant securing alternative accommodation, against them. Both these revision petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. The parties are being referred to as 'the tenant' and 'the landladies' for the sake of convenience.2. The brief facts of the case which are necessary for deciding these revisions are as follows:The landladies, who are the owners of the schedule premises bearing No...

Narasamma Vs. Collector and District Magistrate and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT31

ORDERD.S.R. Varma, J.1. Heard Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri C. Praveen Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents.2. This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce one Kasturi Vasu @ Devarapalli Vasu, husband of the petitioner, who is now detained in Central Prison, Hyderabad.3. Pursuant to the order of detention, dated 28-7-2008, passed by the first respondent-the Collector and District Magistrate, Visakhapatnam (hereinafter referred to as 'the competent authority'), under Section 3(1) and (2) read with Section 2(a) and (f) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-Leggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (for brevity 'the Act'), the husband of the petitioner was subjected to deterntion.4....

C.N. Singotam Vs. Apsrtc Rep. by Its Managing Director and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT186

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. Petitioner filed instant writ petition seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to pay hire charges in respect of bus bearing No. AP o3/U 3929 hired by Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (RTC, for short), for plying the bus on the route, from Chitttoor to Eguvakanikapuram, which was allegedly not paid. The reason for nonpayment of hire charges for the period from 15-6-2003 to 31-7-2003 is alleged refund of a sum of Rs. 90,688/- towards excess hire charges in respect of bus bearing No. TN 33/E 6363 belonging to fourth respondent, which was engaged by RTC during the period from 7-2-1999 to 6-2-2001.2. The fact of the matter, which is not in dispute and forms essential background to solve the dispute, is as follows. In furtherance of their policy, RTC hired buses from private owners to ply on nationalized routes. For the purpose of plying bus in one such route, namely, Chittoor to Eguvakanikapuram, tenders were invited. Fourth respondent was successful ...

Waltair Club Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (2008)IIILLJ652AP

ORDERG. Yethirajulu, J.1. C.M.A. No. 447/2006 was preferred against the decree and order in O.P. No. 20/2000, dated December 30, 2005, on the file of the Principal senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. O.P. No. 20/2000 was filed by the petitioner under Section 75 of the Employees State Insurance Act to declare the petitioner club from the exemption of the Employees State Insurance Act similar to the exemption given to other clubs in the State of Andhra Pradesh; to declare the show-cause notice dated June 8, 2000 issued by the third respondent-Employees State Insurance Corporation, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and to declare the observations of the Insurance Inspector in the report dated March 31, 2000 as illegal and void and without jurisdiction, but the Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both parties, held that the petitioner club comes within the purview of ESI Act and that the observations of the Insurance Inspector made in the repor...

G. Boyanna S/O Late Sheshaiah Vs. the High Court of A.P. Rep. by Its R ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT462

ORDERP.V. Sanjay Kumar, J.1. Whether the petitioner, having turned his back on the promotion given to him earlier, can lay a claim to be considered for promotion thereafter is the short question arising for decision in this writ petition.The admitted facts of the case are as hereunder:The petitioner was originally appointed as a Process Server in the Last Grade Service of the Judicial Department. He was appointed on transfer temporarily as a Junior Assistant vide Proceedings in RCA No. 35/95, dated 07.02.1995 of the District and Sessions Judge, Nellore, second respondent herein. He submitted application dated 23.10.2000 to the District and Sessions Judge, Nellore, stating to the effect that his parents had expired two years prior thereto, casting the entire burden of the family upon him. He further cited grounds of ill-health and his lack of understanding of the English language as reasons for his facing difficulty in discharging the duties of a Junior Assistant. He therefore requested...

Novel Granites Ltd. Rep by Its Managing Director, E. Vijay Kumar Rao, ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2009AP107

C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.In this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners called in question the legality and validity of the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Dealers Rules, 2000 (for short, 'the Rules') notified by respondent No. 1 vide G.O.Ms. No. 537, Industries and Commerce (M.I) Department, dated 11.10.2000.The petitioners, most of whom are industrial units involved in the processing and pulverizing of mineral and some of them who are lessees to extract mineral such as Granite, Dolamite, White Shale, Lime Stone, steatite have mainly felt aggrieved by the definition of 'Mineral' contained in Rule 2(1)(h) of the Rules as amended by G.O.Ms. No. 330 dated 14.06.2001.THE PETITIONERS' CASE:The case of the petitioners in short is that the definition of 'Mineral', which enlarged the scope of mineral as defined in Section 3(a) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act') is far beyond the delegated power of respondent No. 1. The petitioners averred that by e...

The Gudivada Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sheik Mahaboobi and ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT174

B. Prakash Rao, J.1. Heard Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Sri S. Ramachandra Rao, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents 1 to 10 herein and the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation.2. The appellant is a Cooperative Urban Bank, the respondent No.4 in a writ petition filed by the respondents 1 to 10 herein where they sought for a Mandamus declaring the action of the appellant and other respondents in presenting the voters list dated 8-9-2008, which was released to contesting candidates and made public on 19-8-2008 i.e. after the date of withdrawals, by deleting more than 7000 votes including the votes of the respondents 2 to 10 out of 12000 votes, without calling for objections and without issuing any notice and conducting elections to the appellant bank as illegal and violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India apart from violative of principles of natural ju...

Ganna Venkatarama Narasaiah S/O G. Mallaiah Vs. the Government of Andh ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT487

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. These two writ petitions are filed by the same individual. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as arrayed in W.P. No. 19060 of 2008.2. The elections to the Mandal Parishad, Munagala, were held in the year 2006. The petitioner was elected as Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency Member, from Repala Village of Munagala Mandal. The Mandal Parishad comprises of 12 such Members. The petitioner was elected as President of the Mandal Parishad.3. Respondents 4 to 12 submitted a requisition to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Suryapet, the 3rd respondent herein, with a request to convene a meeting of the Mandal Parishad, to express lack of confidence in the petitioner. Acting on the same, the 3rd respondent issued a notice in Form-V of the Rules published in G.O.Ms. No. 200, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Mandal-I), dated 28.04.1998 (for short 'the Rules'), proposing to conduct the meeting of the Mandal Parishad on 27.08.2008. A meetin...

The Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, South Centr ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(1)ALT517

A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. A short question that arises for consideration in all these writ appeals is whether the ancillary staff of Railway Protection Force (herein after called as 'the Force') are entitled to draw the same scales as admissible to other enrolled members of the force (combative staff).W.P. Nos. 15161/1991 and 20028/2000 were filed by the ancillary staff, and W.P. Nos. 15493/2000 and 18413/2000 were filled by the Railway Protection Force Association for issuing a Mandamus by directing the respondents to implement the pay scales as mentioned in Rule 78 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 (for short 'the Rules') by declaring that the ancillary staff do come under the category of Constables, Naiks, Head Constables as per Rules 75 and 78 of the Rules and to fix the pay scales accordingly by paying arrears.2. By the impugned order dt.29-07-2002 a learned single Judge of this Court allowed W.P. Nos. 15161/1991, 15493/2000 and 20028/2000 declaring that the petitioners/ancil...

Dr. M.A. Gafoor and Others Vs. MedwIn Hospitals and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

D. Appa Rao, President: This is a case of medical negligence 1. The case of the complainants in brief is that, complainant No. 1 is the father, complainant No. 2 is the mother and complainant No. 3 is the wife of late Azeezur Rahman who was working as a software engineer in M/s. Infotech Enterprises Ltd., Hyderabad on a salary of Rs. 2,35,045 per annum. While so, on 17.10.2003 at about 9.30 a.m. while going to his office on a bike he fell down and sustained simple fracture with displacement in radius of the left forearm, and was treated as out-patient at NIMS, Hyderabad. The doctors at NIMS advised surgery. Since he had a medi-claim policy, and was under the impression that the treatment in private corporate hospitals would be good, he got admitted in opposite party No. 1 hospital. On 18.1.2003 opposite party No. 2 Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon examined the deceased advised him to undergo the operation. Accordingly, opposite party No. 2 performed open reduction and internal fixation o...