Andhra Pradesh Court October 2015 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.
Samson Arthur Vs. Quinn Logistic India Pvt. Ltd. and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-2015
Common Judgment: (Ramesh Ranganathan, J.) Aggrieved by the order passed in C.A. No.1163 of 2013 in C.P. No.30 of 2012 dated 25.03.2015, the 2nd respondent therein has filed O.S.A. No.10 of 2015. O.S.A. No.11 of 2015 is filed by the 3rd respondent in C.A. No.1163 of 2013 in C.P. No.30 of 2012, aggrieved by the very same order passed on 25.03.2015. As both the appeals are preferred against the very same order, by Sri Samson Arthur and Sri N. Chandrasekhar Rao (appellants in O.S.A. No.10 and 11 of 2015 respectively), they were heard together, and are being disposed of by a common order. Parties shall, hereinafter, be referred to as they are arrayed in these appeals. C.A. No.1163 of 2013 was filed by the respondent- company herein i.e., Quinn Logistics India Pvt. Ltd, (hereinafter referred to as QLI ?), represented by its Director and Authorised Signatory Mr. Robert Dix, under Rule 9 of the Company Court Rules read with Section 340 Cr.P.C. and Sections 191, 192, 193 and 209 I.P.C, seeking ...
G. Venkatachalam Others Vs. The Govt of A.P., reptd by the Principal S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-2015
The petitioners were appointed as Daily Wage Workers by respondent No.3 during 1984 to 1988. In pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance and Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 22.4.1994, which envisaged regularisation of Daily Wage Workers/NMRs, subject to their satisfying the conditions stipulated therein, respondent No.3 has sent proposals to respondent No.1 on 17.9.1997 for regularisation of services of the petitioners. The said proposals were kept pending with respondent No.1 till 10.4.2003 when it has issued G.O.Ms.No.101, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (RDII) Department, dated 10.4.2003, directing respondent No.3 to regularize the services of the petitioners with prospective effect i.e., from the date of issue of the said G.O. in the categories of Junior Assistant, Typist, Driver, Record Assistant and Sweeper respectively. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that after their regularisation, they submitted representations to the respondents for their regularisation with ...
V. Venkateshu Vs. The Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pra ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-2015
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner's claim for appointment to the post of Sub-Engineer, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims to be a person with physical disability and that he falls under the category of locomotor disability. In pursuance of an employment notification issued by the respondents, he has applied for the post of Sub-Engineer. The notification has reserved one post for visually impaired. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that no candidate with visual impairment has applied for the post of Sub-Engineer and in spite of the same the respondents have not allotted the quota reserved for visually impaired person to the petitioner by inter-changing the same. The petitioner has relied upon the correspondence between respondent No.1 on one side and respondent No.4 on the other, on the interchangeability. It is unnecessary to refer to this correspondence for the reason that under the...
K. Srinivasulu Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Prin ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-2015
1. This writ petition is filed seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 30.07.2015, served on 06.08.2015, as irrational, illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same. 2. Heard Sri P. Gangaiah Naidu, learned senior counsel, representing Sri N. Bharat Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.K. Narasimha Rao, learned standing counsel for the 2nd respondent-A.P. Tourism Development Corporation. 3. It is submitted that after completion of Post-Graduation in Commerce, the petitioner, joined as Senior Accountant on contract basis in the office of the 2nd respondent-Corporation on 08.03.2004. Later on he was posted to the Divisional Office at Tirupati in the year 2004 itself and on the date of issuing charge sheet, he was working at Central Reservation Office (CRO), Tirupati as Senior Accountant. It is further submitted that though he was working as Senior Accountant, he was allotted cashier duties, taking cash co...
Dundoo Ravi Kumar Vs. The Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing ( ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-2015
Common Order: (A. Shankar Narayana, J.) 1. Challenging the common order and decretal order dated 16.12.2014 in I.A. Nos.859, 860 and 888 of 2014, the respondent in L.G.C. No.10 of 1990 on the file of the Special Court under Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short, Special Court') filed these three writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. I.A. No.859 of 2014 was filed seeking amendment of the counter filed in the aforesaid L.G.C.; I.A. No.860 of 2014 was filed for granting of leave to file document; and I.A. No.888 of 2014 was filed for recalling R.W.1 for marking the said document. The Special Court, by the aforesaid common order, dismissed all the three petitions. Hence, the instant writ petitions seeking the relief of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate order or direction and quash the said order and prohibit the Special Court from proceeding with any further enquiry in the aforesaid L.G.C. 3. A brief narration of the proceedin...
Bollaboina Mallesh Vs. Bollaboina Ailaiah Yadav and Others
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2015
Common Order: 1. As the point involved in these two revisions is common, they are disposed of by a common order. 2. CRP No.2816 of 2015 is preferred against orders in I.A.No.117/2015 in O.P.No.01/2013 dated 19-06-2015, whereas CRP No.3174/2015 is preferred against orders in I.A.No.69/2015 in O.P.No.01/2013 dated 19-06-2015. I.A.No.69/2015 is filed under Order XVI Rule 1 (2) R/w.151 CPC to summon Sri V. Krishna Reddy, Head Master, UPS Pallepahad Village, Thoguta Mandal, Medak District. I.A.No.117/2015 is filed under Order XIII Rule 10 R/w.151 CPC to call for the record in O.P.No.02/2013 pending on the file of the very same C ourt. Both these petitions were opposed and the trial Court overruled the objections and allowed both the applications, aggrieved by which, these revisions are filed. 3. The revision petitioner is respondent No.1 in O.P.No.01/2013, which is filed by first respondent herein (who is the petitioner in O.P.No.01/2013) challenging election held to the office of Sarpanch,...
Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Institution Deemed-to-be-Unive ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2015
Common Order: Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation, Institution Deemed-to-be-University, Vijayawada, filed these two writ petitions. In W.P.No.21835 of 2009, the petitioner foundation challenged the proceedings dated 19.09.2009 of the Commissioner of Technical Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner'), appointing the Regional Joint Director of Technical Education, Tirupati, Chittoor District, as an Enquiry Officer to conduct an enquiry into the functioning of Koneru Lakshmaiah College of Engineering, the teaching unit of the petitioner foundation, while in W.P.No.22751 of 2011, it assailed the proceedings dated 18.06.2011 of the Commissioner appointing the Regional Joint Director of Technical Education, Kakinada, East Godavari District, as an Enquiry Officer to conduct an enquiry into the functioning of its teaching unit, Koneru Lakshmaiah College of Engineering. Consequential directions were sought to the authorities in both the writ petitio...
U. Krishna Murthy Vs. Secretary, Telecom Commission, New Delhi and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2015
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. This Writ Petition is directed against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in O.A. No. 1574 of 2001 instituted by this writ petitioner, rejecting the request made by him to retire from service on voluntary basis, in terms of and in accordance with Rule 48-A of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. As the respondents were contemplating certain disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, they refused to grant him permission to retire voluntarily from service on completion of 20 years qualifying service. It is in that context, the O.A. came to be instituted. Sri Ch. Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that when once the rule makes it clear that the government servant can retire from service on completion of 20 years of qualifying service, the rejection to grant any such permission can only be for a valid reason. In the instant case, the permission has been denied on the ground that disciplin...
P. Venkateshwara Naik and Another Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2015
The petitioners belong to Lambadi community, a recognized Scheduled Tribe. The second petitioner is the minor son of the first petitioner. He was selected for admission in Ist Class in Hyderabad Public School, Begumpet, in 2005, upon passing an entrance test. This was pursuant to his sponsorship by the Tribal Welfare Department of the State under a scholarship scheme promulgated for the benefit of Scheduled Tribe children. The eligibility prescription for availing the scholarship was that the parental income of the child should not exceed Rs.12,000/- per annum. Pertinent to note, several applicants under this scheme appeared at the entrance test and the second petitioner was one of the successful candidates. The Commissioner of Tribal Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, issued proceedings dated 23.03.2005 recording that the social status of the candidates provisionally selected by Hyderabad Public School, Begumpet and Ramanthapur, had been verified and as their claims were found to be genuine, pr...
R. Bazar Vs. The Secretary to Government (GAD), Government of Andhra P ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-12-2015
Order: (Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.) This Writ Petition is preferred by a Senior Inspector/Auditor of the Cooperative Department challenging the correctness of the view expressed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in its order dated 06.02.2004 passed in O.A.No. 7106 of 1999. The following facts are very relevant for our inquiry: The petitioner appears to have been directly recruited to the service of the Cooperative Department of the State as a Junior Assistant on 11.08.1973. He was promoted on 08.01.1987 as a Senior Inspector. By about the year 1993, he seems to have crossed the age of 45 years. Initially, the State Government announced its policy decision through G.O.Ms.No. 165, General Administration (Service-C) Department, dated 22.04.1997 granting exemption, in case of those employees, who have crossed 45 years of age, from passing certain departmental tests, which are prescribed as a condition precedent either under the Special Rules or State and Subordinate Service Rules...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »