Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-29-1978
Reported in : AIR1979AP85
Sambasiva Rao, C.J. 1. Quite a large number of creditors in the rural areas in the State of Andhra Pradesh are challenging in these writ petitions the validity of the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Indebtedness (Relief) Act. 1977 (Act No. 7 of 1977) hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. After the Legislature of Andhra Pradesh Passed it, the Governor of the State reserved it for the assent of the President of India on the 15th of April. 1977 and it was given by the President on the 29th of April, 1977. The Act was intended 'to provide relief from indebtedness to agricultural labourers, rural l artisans and small farmers in the State of Andhra Pradesh and for matters connected therewith.'2. The indictment of the Act is by way of challenging the validity of Sections 3 (i) 3( t), 4 (1), 4 (2) (b), 5 (1), 5 (4), 6 (4) and 13. Sri Babulu Reddy who mounted the main attack on behalf of the petitioners, maintained that these provisions offend Art. 14 and cls. (f) and (g) of Art. 19(1). He further ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-28-1978
Reported in : AIR1979AP182
Madhava Reddy, J.1. This writ petition comes up before us on reference by our learned Brothers, Kondaiah, J. and Lakshmaiah J. principally for the consideration of the question 'Whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction and is competent to entertain an application under S. 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act by a single or a group of workmen in his or their individual capacity claiming minimum bonus under S. 10 of the Payment of Bonus Act against his or their employer and decide the questions relating to the claim of minimum bonus in view of S. 22 of the Payment of Bonus Act?'. Our learned brothers also observed that incidentally the nature, scope and ambit of S. 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act falls for decision.2. M/s. Anand Oil Industries, a Partnership firm, hereinafter referred to as the employer, has filed this petition for the issuance of a writ of prohibition against the Labour Court Hyderabad (1st respondent herein) prohibiting it from deciding or proceeding with M. ...
Tag this Judgment!