Andhra Pradesh Court November 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.
Mendu Sathi Reddy and Others Vs. Mendu Madhusudan Reddy
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 22.04.2015 passed in I.A.No.433 of 2014 in O.S.No.95 of 2013 by the Junior Civil Judge, Alair, whereunder the I.A filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 r/w Section 151 C.P.C., seeking to appoint Advocate-Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule property, was dismissed. The petitioners are defendants in the suit. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction against the petitioners/defendants. The petitioners filed I.A seeking to appoint Advocate Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule property, stating that the respondent/plaintiff purchased the suit scheduled property admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.00 gts., from the 1st defendant in Sy.No.85 and Ac.2.20 gts., from one Laxminarsimha Reddy and by taking advantage of the same, the respondent/plaintiff is trying to occupy the land of the petitioners/defendants ...
Dr. Ambedkar Global Law Institute, rep. by its Correspondent and Other ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
Common Order: Challenge in these writ petitions is to the Circular dated 08.10.2015 issued by the Andhra Pradesh State Council of Higher Education (APSCHE), in so far as it imposed a fine of Rs.5,000/- per student admitted from other than the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, which was to be paid by the management of the college concerned, and required the management to also submit antecedent reports as regards such students. The matters are amenable to final disposal as the pleadings are complete and Sri D.V.Sitarama Murthy, learned senior counsel appearing for Smt.Machikalapati Renuka, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.35468 of 2015, Sri S.Sri Ram, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.35522 of 2015, Sri Y.Kishore, learned standing counsel for the APSCHE, and Sri C.Sudesh Anand, learned counsel for the Convenor, LAWCET/PGLCET-2015, advanced comprehensive arguments covering the gamut of issues arising in these cases. W.P.No.35468 of 2015 was filed by five col...
Pulagam Ratnavathi Vs. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Rashtriya I ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
This writ petition was filed assailing the action of the Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (RINL), Visakhapatnam, in not considering the petitioner for compassionate appointment to a Class IV post and to set aside the proceedings dated 04.02.2005 issued by the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, RINL, Visakhapatnam, rejecting her request for such appointment. This writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 07.08.2015. WPMP No.33286 of 2015 was filed seeking restoration of the writ petition. Accepting the reasons set out in the supporting affidavit, the dismissal order is set aside. The writ petition is restored to file and is taken up for disposal on merits. The petitioner's husband was a permanent employee of the RINL, Visakhapatnam. He died in a road accident on 22.08.1993 while on his way to attend to his duties. The petitioner thereupon submitted a representation seeking compassionate appointment in the RINL as there was no other earning member in the family. The petitioner claims ...
Amarender Kumar Sandra and Others Vs. Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowl ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
Common Order: 1. The composite State of Andhra Pradesh enacted Act XVIII of 2008 for establishment and incorporation of Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies (RGUKT, for short) in the State of Andhra Pradesh and establishment of constituent institutions at Basara, Nuzvid and Idupulapaya in the then Composite State of Andhra Pradesh. The Act came into force with effect from 22-12-2007. The three institutions are located at Basara in Telangana, Nuzvid in Andhra and Idupulapaya in Rayalaseema. They are under the control of the Governing Council, which is the apex body. The Government of State of Andhra Pradesh has sanctioned 438 permanent faculty posts of Professors, Associate Professors and Assistant Professors in various subjects of Engineering Sciences, Humanities etc., in RGUKT vide G.O.Ms.No.4, Finance (SMPC-I) Department, dated 04-01-2013. In pursuance of the proceedings of the 4th respondent, the respondents 1 to 3-University (RGUKT) has advertised a Notification vide A...
A.V.M. High School, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District Vs. The State ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
The petitioner is a High School situated at Rajendranagar in Ranga Reddy District. It sought sanction of grant-in-aid for 21 posts in its service as per the recommendation of a High Level Committee. However, by Memo dated 25.01.2011, the Government rejected its request. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner school filed this case. A consequential direction was sought to the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner school for admission to grant-in-aid as per the High Level Committee's recommendations, as its claim was before 20.10.2004, when a ban on recruitment was imposed. The petitioner school was established in the year 1976-77 to impart education from Kindergarten to IV Class. Thereafter, it was upgraded to a fullfledged High School in the year 1988-89. Out of the 32 posts in its service, only 7 were admitted to grant-in-aid. The petitioner school accordingly made a representation in the year 1999 seeking sanction of grant-in-aid for more posts. However, no orders were passed...
K. Sugandha Kumari Vs. K. Vijaya Laxmi
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dt.23-09-2011 in I.A.No.1115 of 2010 in O.P.No.750 of 2009 of the Judge, Family Court at Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner is husband of respondent. The respondent had given birth to a female child on 03-12-2008. He filed the O.P. seeking dissolution of their marriage on the ground of cruelty and also on the ground that respondent had committed adultery. 3. Pending O.P., the petitioner filed I.A.No.1115 of 2010 before the Family Court to direct the petitioner, respondent and the child to undergo a D.N.A. Test at Center for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad by giving blood samples for conducting scientific investigation so as to decide the paternity of the child and to submit a report. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of this application, the petitioner contended that ever since they got married, the respondent was reluctant to consummate the marriage, that she had been indifferent and had not evinced any interest to ...
Pilli Mohan Yadav Vs. M. Venkateswarlu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-2015
1. This contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dt.24.10.2014, in Writ Petition No.31907 of 2014. 2. I have heard Mr. B. Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Chatla Madhu, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC), appearing for the respondent. 3. The petitioner herein has filed the above mentioned writ petition with the grievance that respondent No.3 therein is constructing a building consisting of ground + three floors without even obtaining permission from the GHMC. By the above mentioned order, this Court has directed the respondent to ensure that respondent No.3 in the writ petition does not carry on further construction without a sanctioned plan being in existence. Alleging that in spite of the said order the respondent herein has deliberately failed to take any action to stop the illegal construction, the petitioner has filed this contempt case. 4. Along with the contempt case, the petitioner has filed...
Konakalla Suresh @ Mukku Suresh @ Rushi and Others Vs. The State of Te ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-2015
The petitioners/A-1 to A-10 in Crime No.279 of 2009 of SHO, Chotutuppal, registered for the offences punishable under Section 400 IPC and police after registration of the crime and after completion of investigation filed final report against them that was taken cognizance by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Ramannapet as PRC No.8 of 2015 to commit the case to the Court of Sessions for the offence under Section 400 IPC, they filed the present criminal petition saying earlier on the same allegations they faced trial in S.C. No.61 of 2008 and SC No.34 of 2010 which cases were ended in acquittal after trial, thereby, the present PRC proceedings are barred by Section 300 Cr.P.C, for the reason even in the earlier offence mentioned as 395 IPC and presently mentioned as if under Section 400 IPC. 2) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as 1st respondent ”State and the 2nd respondent ”SHO, Choutuppal represented by learned public prosecutor and perused th...
Shaik Azeem Uddin Vs. The State of Telangana, reptd by its Principal S ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-2015
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside order, dated 15.10.2015, in I.A.No.633 of 2015 in O.P.No.234 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Nizamabad. I have heard Mr. A.Sudershan Reddy, learned senior counsel for Mr. M.Rajender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner was elected as Corporator of Ward No.39 of Nizamabad Municipal Corporation. Respondent No.3, who is a voter, filed the above-mentioned O.P. for setting aside the said election of the petitioner. In the said O.P., the petitioner filed I.A.No.633 of 2015 for dismissing the said O.P. only on the ground that respondent No.3 has already availed the remedy of approaching the Commissioner of Nizamabad Municipal Corporation for disqualifying him under Section-23-D of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short the Act') and that therefore, having availed such a remedy, he is not entitled to file the O.P. The lower Court h...
Shaik Magbul Basha Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-2015
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in directing the petitioner to remove the compound wall at Door No.21-2-23/6, Itikampadu Road, Ponnur, Guntur District, vide notice, dated 23.10.2015, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to demolish the compound wall. The petitioner claims to be an ex-army person and has constructed a building over a property purchased by him under a registered sale deed, dated 22.10.2007, after obtaining permission from respondent No.2 municipality. He has further alleged that on the complaint given by a person, viz., Naidamma, who is constructing an apartment on the southern side of the petitioner's house, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner has occupied the municipal road margin without permission, respondent No.2 has issued the impugned notice in exercise of his power under Section 192 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 (for s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »