Andhra Pradesh Court July 2008 Judgments

E. Shankar Reddy S/O. E. Nagi Reddy, Inspector of Police Vs. P. Ramase ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(6)ALT738

ORDERC.V. Ramulu, J.1. In all these Writ Petitions, the question that arises for consideration is whether mere seniority alone is the criteria or is there any eligibility criteria, apart from the seniority in a particular cadre, for the purpose of promotion to the higher post ?2. Petitioners were all initially appointed as Reserve Sub-Inspectors (RSIs) of Category-3 of Class I of A.P. Police Subordinate Service. The RSIs are entitled to be appointed as Sub-Inspectors (Civil) in Category-1 of Class 1, against 5% of the vacancies earmarked for them. The RSIs, on transfer, are put on probation and sent for 6 months training. The RSIs, who had put in 5 years and more service in Class I Category-3 posts of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules (for short 'Special Rules'), on conversion as SIs (Civil) and after completion of probation and training, according to them, are entitled for being promoted to the post of Inspector of Police (Civil) i.e. Category 4 of A.P. Police Servic...

Budha Raju Sreenivasa Raju Vs. Budha Raju Rama

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(5)ALD831

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard the Counsel.2. Sri Rama Gopal, the learned Counsel representing the petitioner would submit that when an Additional Family Court was constituted at Visakhapatnam, though this matter was part-heard before the original Family Court, this matter also was transferred and it would be just and proper if the said Family Court further proceeds with this matter since the matter already was made part-heard before the said Court.3. Sri T.N.M. Ranga Rao, however, would maintain that the petitioner is the husband and since the petitioner is not interested in the disposal of the O.P., this Tr.C.MP. had been thought of.This Tr.C.M.P. is filed to transfer of No. 95/2007 on the file of the Additional Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam in the interest of justice and pass such other suitable orders.4. It is stated that OP No. 95/2007 'was filed on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam by the petitioner under Sect...

M. Somaiah Vs. Apsrtc and anr.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(6)ALD129; [2008(119)FLR766]

ORDERL. Narasimha Reddy, J.1. The petitioner was employed as a Driver in Suryapet Depot of APSRTC. The Depot Manager, the 2nd respondent herein, issued a charge-sheet dated 27.11.2006, alleging that the petitioner contested in the election for the office of Sarpanch of Ambajipet Grampanchayat, held on 2.8.2006, without obtaining prior permission of the competent authority, in terms of Regulation 23(3) of APSRTC (Conduct) Regulations 1963. A further allegation was made to the effect that the petitioner did not inform the depot authorities about his contesting in the election. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 24.3.2008, admitting the factum of his contesting the elections. He, however, stated that in view of the clarification issued by the State Election Commission, he found that it is not necessary to obtain prior permission, or to resign his job. The 2nd respondent passed an order dated 1.7.2008, dismissing the petitioner from service. The petitioner challenges the order of ...

G. Shymala Raju and ors. Vs. Commissioner, Appeals, Office of the Chie ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(6)ALD577

ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. An interesting question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the wife of an Attender, who at the relevant time was working in the Office of Chief Planning Officer, Eluru and drawing a salary of Rs. 407/- per month, was a landless poor person or not.2. The undisputed facts are that by proceedings, dated 3.12.1985, the mother of the petitioners was assigned the land admeasuring Ac.1.24 cents in R.S. Nos. 90 and 91 of Kotha Mupparru Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. It is admitted in the counter-affidavit that even prior to the said assignment, she occupied the said land and developed the same. Eight years later, respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who did not file any appeal against the said assignment, approached respondent No. 2 by way of a revision petition against the said assignment. The accusation against the assignee was that by misrepresenting the facts, she obtained assignment, though her husband was working as Atte...

K.P. Gnana Prakasam Vs. K. Lakshmi Narasamma

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(6)ALD831

ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. This Tr.C.M.P. is filed praying for transfer of suit O.S. No. 1048/ 2006 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa, to any Court in Chittoor District and pass such other suitable orders.2. The petitioner is an Advocate by profession. The respondent filed O.S. No. 14/ 2001 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Pulivendula against the petitioner praying for recovery of amount on the basis of a promissory note executed by him. It is also stated that the suit promissory note was not at all executed at E. Kothapalli of Pulivendula Mandal of Kadapa District as alleged by the respondent, but actually the same was executed at Srikalahasti of Chittoor District. Further certain contentions touching the merits and demerits of the matter relating to material alterations and other aspects also had been averred. It is also stated that the suit was decreed without giving opportunity of adducing evidence. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred A.S....

P. Kamalamma Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(6)ALD798

ORDERC.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.1. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent No. 3 in threatening to demolish the petitioner's dwelling house bearing Door No. 13/107 situated in Survey No. 303/1, L.B. Nagar, Muthyalareddipalli, Tirupathi (Urban) Mandal, Tirupathi, as arbitrary, discriminatory and illegal. The petitioner sought for a direction to the respondents to assign the said land to her to the extent of dwelling house or alternatively, regularise her occupation over the said land on payment of market value prevailing on the date of construction of the said house.Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner encroached into land admeasuring 194 sq.yards, which admittedly belongs to the Government, and constructed a dwelling house thereon. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Ms. No. 508, Revenue (ASN-I) Department, dated 20.10.1995 providing for regularisation of the illegal occupation of the lan...

J. Kanaka Durga Vs. S.C. Womens Degree College and ors.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(2)ALT412

R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. This writ appeal, under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is filed aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge dated 03-01-2006, passed in W.P. No. 31821 of 1998.2. Facts, which led to filing of the writ appeal, in brief, are as hereunder:The writ petitioner, who is the appellant in this appeal, has filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking Writ of Mandamus to declare the selection of the fifth respondent as Principal of S.C. Women's Degree College, Kothagudem, as illegal, with further directions to review the selections to the post of Principal. However, the learned single Judge, by the impugned order, upheld the selection of the fifth respondent.3. The appellant is a lecturer in the first respondent college, which was established by the fourth respondent, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem, by obtaining permission as required under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982. The appellant was appointed as a lecturer in the year...

P. Gyanchander Vs. K. Parvathalu and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Mrs. M. Shreesha, Member: 1. Aggrieved by the order in C.D. No. 963 of 2004 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad, opposite party No. 5 preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that opposite party No. 1 is the chit fund company of which opposite party No. 2 is the Managing Director, and opposite parties 3, 4 and 5 are Directors and the complainant joined as a member of opposite party No. 1 chit series No. SP 42 BDH-47 for Rs. 1,00,000 on the basis of daily subscription of Rs. 200 for 500 days. The complainant paid a total amount of Rs. 81,298 from 23.12.2001 to 29.4.2003 and in the month of May 2003, the complainant wanted his money back for the purpose of the marriage of his daughter and requested opposite party No. 1 to settle and pay the said chit amount. In spite of repeated requests of the complainant, opposite party No. 1 informed the complainant that they are facing financial problems and agreed to pay a total amount of Rs. 88,459 towards fu...

Amrutha Wines Rep. by Its Licencee Ravula Aruna Kumar S/O. Ramanaiah, ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(5)ALD707; 2008(6)ALT485

ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.1. The three petitioners are existing licensees for the sale of Indian Made Foreign Liquor and Foreign Liquor by shop license in Form A4 operating from different premises in Ward No. 10, Periyavaram Cross Road, Venkatagiri-II, Nellore District. The 4th respondent is an existing licensee having a Form IIB license under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules, 2005 (for short 'the Bar Rules') viz., a Bar and Restaurant. The licensed premises of the 4th respondent is in D. No. 16-15, Ward No. 17, Venkatagiri town, Nellore District. The 4th respondent appears to have applied for shifting of the premises to Ward No. 10, Venkatagiri town. Aggrieved that such shifting will adversely impact the petitioners' business, the petitioners appear to have made representations to the Excise officials on which the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Nellore called for a detailed report from his subo...

Vijaya Vasava Motors Rep. by Its Proprietix B. Padmavathi W/O. Kishore ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: (2009)19VST322(AP)

ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. The endorsement of the respondent dated 28.05.2008, directing the petitioner to pay tax of Rs. 72,394/- pursuant to the order of the revisional authority dated 24.11.2006, is questioned in this writ petition as arbitrary, unjust and contrary to G.O.Ms. No. 144 dated 11.02.2008. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to implement G.O.Ms. No. 144 and to take consequential action with regards the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04. 2. Facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is a registered dealer on the rolls of the respondent. They filed returns for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 disclosing sale and purchase of two and three wheelers as also spare parts, replacement of spare parts during the warranty period and servicing charges collected towards servicing of the vehicles. The assessment order, for the assessment year 2002-03 dated 31.12.2003, was revised by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Eluru on 23.11.2006, tax was levied on the amounts...