Andhra Pradesh Court September 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.
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Departme ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2015
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. The State of Telangana and several of its officers are the petitioners in this Writ Petition. They challenge the sustainability of the orders passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.200 of 2015, dated 22.04.2015. The said O.A. has been instituted by one Sri B. Chandmal, a Police Constable attached to Khammam District Unit of the State Police, who has since retired on medical invalidation grounds, and his son Sri B. Sunil Nayak. The 1st applicant Sri Chandmal, while working as a Police Constable with the Civil Police of Khammam District Unit appears to have suffered a critical setback to his health and hence, submitted an application seeking his retirement from service on medical invalidation grounds. As is too well-known, a person will be able to earn terminal benefits if he had retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation or upon according permission to retire prematurely or upon imposition of punishment of compulsory reti...
N. Nageswar Rao Vs. Telangana Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd. ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2015
1. This writ petition is filed for a certiorari to quash the proceedings in Memo No.CMD/CGM/HRD/JS/AS-DC/PO-E/C-2/F.No.1234/07-25, dated 23.12.2010 of respondent No.2. 2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are stated hereunder. The petitioner was appointed in the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board (APSEB) on 17.11.1988 as Sub-overseer, at Vyra in Khammam District. In the year 1997 he was promoted as Additional Assistant Engineer and was transferred to Sattupally, Khammam District, in the year 1999. While he was working as Additional Assistant Engineer (Operations), Khammam, the Chairman and Managing Director of Northern Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Limited, (successor to the APSEB) appointed respondent No.3 as enquiry officer to enquire into the purported grave charges against the petitioner and five other officers, by authorizing him to frame specific charges on the material available on record. In pursuance thereof, respondent No.3 h...
Vempati Venkateswar Rao Vs. Challa Vijaya and Another
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2015
Common Order: The common order dated 02.02.2015 passed in I.A.Nos.252, 253 and 254 of 2014 in O.S.No.410 of 2014 is under challenge. The said I.As., were filed by the petitioner seeking to reopen, recall PW.1 and receive and admit the certified copies of deposition of PW.1 and the judgment in C.C.No.387 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kodada. By common order dated, 02.02.2014, the said I.As., were dismissed. The petitioner is the plaintiff and the suit is filed seeking specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 25.01.2003. The petitioner was examined and cross examined as PW.1 on 03.06.2011 and a memo was filed on 17.06.2011 reserving his right to adduce rebuttal evidence. On behalf of the defendants, defendant No.2 was examined as DW.4, who deposed before the Court that he filed a complaint in Crime No.70 of 2007 at Police Station Kodada Town and the same was registered as C.C.No.387 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ko...
Chapiri Kuderu Shakshavali and Another Vs. Shaik Isthak Ahamed and Oth ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2015
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dt.31.10.2014 in CMA.No.19 of 2014 of the District Judge, Anantapur confirming the order dt.30.07.2014 in I.A.No.346 of 2014 in O.S.No.155 of 2009 of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapur. 2. The petitioners herein are the plaintiffs in the above suit. The said suit was filed for a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with their alleged peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. 3. Written statement was filed by the respondents opposing the suit claim. 4. After issues were framed and when the case was coming for cross-examination of PW1, it was posted to 13.03.2014. On that day, the 1st petitioner/1st plaintiff failed to appear before the Court for his cross-examination. So, the suit was dismissed for default. 5. On 01.04.2014, the 1st petitioner filed I.A.No.346 of 2014 under Order IX Rule 9 CPC to set aside the order dismissing the suit for default. He contended tha...
Balavenkatagari Rama Muni Reddy Vs. K. Fakruddin
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2015
The petitioner is the decree holder of money suit O.S.No.111 of 2013 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Jammalamadugu filed against the respondent-judgment debtor, who is a retired railway Gangman, Railway Kondapuram Village and Mandal and the petitioner filed EP No.1 of 2014 to recover the decretal debt and for attachment under Order 21 Rule 52 of C.P.C. and also to recover the amount lying with Andhra Bank, Gooty Branch in the account of the judgment debtor supra. The respondent - judgment debtor opposed the prayer for attachment with counter contest as can be seen from paragraph No.3 of the order of the lower court in saying no amount lying in Bank account apart from he is retired employee eking out livelihood by getting meager pension and has no means to discharge E.P. amount and the other contention is plea for discharge of E.P. amount in seeking to dismiss the execution petition. The decree holder himself examined as PW.1 and on behalf of the judgment debtor RW.1 “ railway ...
R. Rama Rao Vs. The Railway Board and Others rep. by its Member Secret ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2015
P. Naveen Rao, J. 1. Reference to this Full Bench is on the issue as to whether a casual employee in the Indian Railways, later appointed on temporary basis, and thereafter regularly appointed is entitled to count the full service rendered by him as a temporary servant and 50 % of his casual service as qualifying service for the purpose of determination of his retirement benefits. 2. The Division Bench, having held that Rule 31 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules 1993 (hereinafter referred to as Rules') has no application to the facts of the case and that para-20 of the Master Circular No.54 of 1994 is contrary to the definition of Railway servantas defined in Rule 3(23) of the Rules 1993 and that Rule 31 is applicable to Railway Servants, disagreed with the reasoning given by the earlier Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.24867 of 1999 and referred the matter to this Full Bench for an authoritative pronouncement on the issue. 3. Before answering the reference it may be useful ...
S. Zabeda Parveen Vs. A.P. Women €™s Cooperative Finance Co ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-2015
1. The proceedings of respondent No.2 terminating the services of the petitioner as District Manager (Temporary) under contract employment, are called in question in this writ petition. FACTS: 2. The facts forming the backdrop of the case are briefly summarized as under: Respondent No.1 has undertaken selection process for appointment of Pranganam Officers on contract basis. In pursuance of the employment notification issued by the respondents, the petitioner applied for the said post. She has appeared for written test held on 11.2.1996 and on passing the written test, the petitioner was called for interview on 10.6.1996. The petitioner was selected as Pranganam Officer and was issued appointment order on 20.9.1996, on a consolidated pay of Rs.6,000/- per month for a period of three years. After successful completion of training, the petitioner was posted as Pranganam Officer of Telugu Bala Mahila Pragati Pranganam, at Bommuru, East Godavari District. Though the contract appointment wa...
Mummana Surya Rao Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Anot ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-2015
1. Alleging that the 1st respondent-Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited is trying to dispossess and disengage the petitioner from operating as a Caretaker of the Company Owned Contractor Operated Retail Outlet, situated at Veduruvada Village, Atchuthapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, and the actions of the respondent are sought to be declared as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and for a consequential direction to permit the petitioner to continue as a Caretaker of the said Outlet, this writ petition is filed. 2. When this writ petition came up for admission, it was noticed that from the reliefs noted above, the petitioner claims a legal right only on the basis as a Caretaker of the Petroleum Outlet. Obviously, the petitioner is neither a Lessee nor a Licensee and in order to appreciate as to whether any legal right exists in favour of the petitioner, I have heard Sri S. Niranjan Reddy, counsel representing Sri J. Krishna Dev, learned counsel for the petitioner, at lengt...
The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Hyderabad-II, Commissi ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-2015
Common Judgment: G. Chandraiah, J. These three appeals arise out of the common order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dated 10.05.2005 disposing of the appeals filed by the respondent. The respondent is engaged in the business of interior decoration, manufacture and supplier of furniture. With respect to certain of the works undertaken by the respondent, the order in original dated 26.03.2004 came to be passed and extended period of limitation was invoked. The duty penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short the Act ?) and also under Rule 173Q apart from penalty under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 were determined and demanded from the respondent. Aggrieved by the order in original, the respondent filed appeals before the CESTAT, Bangalore. The adjudicating authority, after considering the material on record and analyzing the facts, found that the major extent of demand pertains to the work, in fact, executed at site ...
Md. Ghouse Vs. The A.P.S.R.T.C. rep. by its Depot Manager, Gadwal and ...
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2015
Aggrieved by the Award dated 01.10.2001 passed by the Labour Court-III, Hyderabad, in I.D.No.85 of 2000, to the extent it denied him backwages with all benefits for the period that he remained out of employment, the petitioner-workman is before this Court. He seeks a consequential direction to the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) to reinstate him in service as a Driver with continuity of service with full backwages and all other consequential benefits. The petitioner-workman was a Driver in the service of the APSRTC. His services were regularized in the year 1992. He was removed from service by order dated 03.10.1997 on the following charges. 1. For having absented for duty unauthorisedly from 1-5-1997 till date, which constitutes misconduct under Reg.28(xxvii) of APSRTC Employees (conduct) Reg.1963 ?. 2. For repeated irregular attendance causing cancellation of services, inconvenience to the traveling Public, besides loss of revenue to the corporation, which co...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »