Andhra Pradesh Court October 2010 Judgments

G. V. Mohan and Others. Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh,

Court: Andhra Pradesh

order: Since the subject-matter of both the writ petitions is inter-connected, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to by their status in W.P. No. 9198 of 2001. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE IN W.P. No. 9198 of 2001 The petitioners, who are the sons and grand-daughter of one late Sri. G.V.L.S. Sarma respectively, filed writ petition in W.P. No. 9198 of 2001, praying the Court to grant the following relief: To issue a Writ, order or direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 2nd respondent in ULC Appeal No. Hyd. 17/2001 dated 28.04.2001, confirming the order of the 3rd respondent in proceedings No.E2/382/74, dated 08.11.2000, as illegal, void and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Petitioner No.1, who swore to the affidavit ...

Sri Gayatri Devi Traders and Another Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2011(NOC)156(AP)

ORDER: 1)The petitioners 1 and 2/A-1 and A/2 are accused of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short, the Act) in C.C. No.471 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. The only point raised in this petition is with regard to procedure adopted by the lower Court before taking cognizance of the case for the above offence by way of receipt of evidence affidavit of the complainant/2nd respondent instead of recording sworn statement of the complainant by the Court and obtaining signature of the complainant therein. This Court previously held in A.V.R.Murthy V. Nunna Venkata Ravanamma1 that such procedure adopted by the Magistrate before taking cognizance of the case for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act is valid and legal in view of specific provision by way of Section 145 contained in the Act. The petitioners' counsel contended that the above decision rendered by this Court is liable to be recons...

K.Pawan Kalyan Vs. D.Kiran Kumar and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: 1.The petitioner is accused of offences punishable under Sections 500 and 501 I.P.C in C.C. No.34 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Wanaparthy. He is stated to be a cine artist and brother of Telugu Cine Star by name Chiranjeevi, who recently established new political party by name 'Praja Rajyam' in this State. It is further stated that the accused was appointed as State President of 'Yuva Rajyam' which is youth wing of the said party. Whereas the complainant/1st respondent is stated to be a practising Advocate in Wanaparthy Courts and also various Courts at Mahaboobnagar and Hyderabad. He claims to be active worker in Indian National Congress Party. Previously the complainant is stated to have been appointed as Wanaparthy Mandal Youth Congress President and presently General Secretary of District Youth Congress. 2) Subject matter of the complaint in the lower Court is contents of public speech given by the accused at Dharna Chowk of Indira Park at H...

Peddinti Padmaja and Another Vs.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: 1. The petitioners 1 and 2/A-1 and A-2 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C in Crime No.136/2009 of Gajuwaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam. On report given by the 2nd respondent/defacto- complainant, the police registered the said crime. It is alleged that the 2nd respondent deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in M/s.Velox Computer Services (P) Limited, Visakhapatnam, for his computer training under an agreement executed between them and that as per the agreement, if the Company removes the 2nd respondent during the training period of 18 months, then the Company has to pay back the deposit and that in pursuance of the said agreement, the Company removed the 2nd respondent within 18 months of period of training by issuing a cheque for Rs.1,00,000/- to him and that when he presented the cheque, it was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds and that when he went to office of the Company, the Company was closed by locking it and without disclosing their address....

M.Koteswara Rao Vs. the Executive Director, Food Corporation of India ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: The petitioner was initially appointed as a Watchmen in the Food Corporation of India (for short 'the Corporation'), on 05.07.1976, against a vacancy reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribes. Over the period, he earned many promotions and on 17.12.2008, he was promoted to the post of Manager. The petitioner states that he belongs to Boya community. On a complaint received by the Corporation, as to the genuinity of the social status of the petitioner, a letter was addressed to the District Collector and Magistrate, Guntur, 4th respondent herein. A reply was received to the effect that no caste certificate, as alleged by the petitioner, was issued to him, at the time of his appointment. Taking the same into account, the Executive Director- competent authority, 1st respondent herein, passed an order dated 09.02.2010, dismissing the petitioner from service. The same is challenged in this writ petition. One of the grounds urged by the petitioner is that he has not been issued any show...

Shaik Abdul Rasool, Kadapa Vs. G.Lakshmi Reddy, Kadapa and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.1198 of 2006 in the Court of the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa against respondent No.1 herein for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. Thereafter, respondent No.1 got herself impleaded and made claim vis- -vis the suit schedule property. Issues were framed and the trial of the suit commenced. During the course of her evidence, respondent No.2 stated that the suit schedule property has accrued to her husband by way of exchange with Kadapa Zilla Parishad. In a way, she has projected independent title in respect of the property. The petitioner filed I.A.No.648 of 2010 under Rules 6, 7 and 14 of Order 16 C.P.C. with a prayer to summon the Chief Executive Officer of Kadapa Zilla Parishad as a witness to produce the records and documents mentioned therein and to speak about them. The application was opposed by the respondents. Through order, dated 22.09.2010, the trial Court dismis...

K.V.Ramana, Chittoor and Others. Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Cou ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: Both the writ petitions are similar in all respects. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. The petitioners are said to have been engaged as N.M.Rs. between 1982 and 1985 by the then Tirupathi Municipality, which, later became Tirupathi Municipal Corporation, respondent No.2 herein. Complaining that their services were terminated on various dates between 1984 and 1987, they filed R.P.Nos.21689 to 21698 of 1989 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal'). An interim order was passed by the Tribunal on 11.08.1989 directing that the case of the petitioners shall be considered for appointment on N.M.R. basis in accordance with the existing Rules and Regulations. In compliance with the interim order, the petitioners were reinstated into service on 06.09.1989 as per the resolution, dated 31.08.1989. Thereafter, R.Ps. were disposed of on 29.09.1994, taking on record, the fact that the petitioners were appointed as N.M.Rs. and di...

Qazi Syed Abdullah Mohammadi, S/O.Late Sri Syed ShareefuddIn Vs. State ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: This Writ Petition came up before us on a reference made by the learned Single Judge, Honourable Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, to be consdiered by a Division Bench in relation to a decision reported in Citizens Welfare Organisation, Hyderabad, v. The Government of A.P., rep. by Secretary, Revenue (Wakf), Hyderabad1, of His Lordships Honourable Sri Justice K.Ramaswamy (as he then was), which relates to remuneration/fees of Naib Kazis. Heard Ms. Manjari.S.Ganu and Sri T.S.Praveen Kumar, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. M.A.K.Mukheed, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Wakf Board and the learned Government Pleaders for Social Welfare and Minority Welfare appearing on behalf of the respondents. The brief account of the facts, which arise in these proceedings, are that the petitioners herein consisting in all about twenty four {24} persons claiming to be Naib Kazis, who have been appointed by the respective Kazis for the respective ...

M/S.Andhra Printers Ltd., J.D.Towers, Vs. the Government of Andhra Pra ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: The fourth respondent is employed as a Sub-Editor with the petitioner. It is stated that he was the President of A.P.Working Journalists' Union at Hyderabad. The petitioner transferred him to Delhi in the year 1997. A civil suit was filed by the fourth respondent and the same was dismissed. He approached the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Hyderabad with a prayer to take steps for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- representing his wages and attendant benefits as provided under Section 17(1) of the Working Journalists Act, 1955. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour passed an order, dated 20.06.2003 as prayed for and requested the District Collector to recover that amount. The petitioner approached the Deputy Commissioner as well as the Joint Commissioner. The order, dated 20.06.2003 was recalled and instead, the Deputy Commissioner addressed proceedings, dated 24.09.2003, to the Government for necessary action; and taking that, and the observations of the Joint Commissioner into acc...

M/S.Madhucon Projects Limited Vs. M/S.B.Girijapathi Reddy and Co.

Court: Andhra Pradesh

ORDER: Defendant No.1 in the suit O.S.No.1153 of 2009 instituted by the respondent No.1 herein (plaintiff) in the Court of the IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad aggrieved by the common order in I.A.No.709 of 2009 and I.A.No.562 of 2009 dated 19.02.2010 has filed these Civil Revision Petitions. C.R.P.No.3335 of 2010 has been filed against the orders in I.A.No.709 of 2009 rejecting the application filed under Section 8 (1) and (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') to refer the parties to participate and continue the proceedings before the Sole Arbitrator (the second respondent herein/Defendant No.2), who has been appointed in terms of Clause 21.3 of the Agreement dated 18.02.2006. C.R.P.(SR) No.16466 of 2010 has been filed against the orders in I.A.No.562 of 2009 whereby the court below granted injunction restraining the second respondent (Defendant No.2) from continuing the arbitration proceedings till the disposal of the suit. As an...