Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: andhra pradesh Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 8 results (0.036 seconds)

Nov 05 1981 (HC)

Jay Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Government of India and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-05-1981

Reported in : 1982(10)ELT378(AP)

..... must be uniform. the allahabad high court held that the deduction of discount cannot be given where it is not uniform. we are not able to discover any principle or rationale for such wide proposition and explanation to section 4 is not susceptible to such an interpretation. the principle of average discount propounded by the calcutta high court in 1978 elt .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 23 1981 (HC)

Nand Kishore Vs. Commissioner of Police

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-23-1981

Reported in : 1982CriLJ1439

gangadhara rao, j.1. this writ petition and writ petitions nos. 6482/1981 and 6741/1981 were heard together. common question of law raised in all the three writ petition are decided in this petition. since facts are separate, separate orders are pronounced in the other two writ petitions. 2. this writ of habeas corpus is filed by nanda kishore questioning the detention of sri arjun singh under section 3(2) of the national security act, 1980 by the commissioner of police hyderabad, by his order dt. 15th may, 1981. 3. the grounds of detention mentioned are : 'on 27-7-80 at 3.00 p.m. you along with bhagwan singh, pratap singh and prakash went to maharaja bar & restaurant, basheerbagh. after consuming beer in the said bar sri bhagwan singh questioned sri sunil roberts who plays according in the band, as to why he failed to play the tune requested by him two or three days ago. so saying sri bhagawan singh caught hold of sri sunil roberts to beat him. due to intervention of beat artists the matter was subsided. again on the same day at about 5.15 p.m. you along with sri bhagawan singh, pratap singh, prakash anoop singh and sham went to the said bar and you along with s/sri bhagawan singh and anoop singh attacked sri sunil roberts who was sitting in front of the counter. you were holding barbers razor and sri anoop singh was holding knife, sunil roberts was beaten by anoop singh, bhagawan singh and shyam with knife causing professed bleading injuries. in the meanwhile you approached .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 1981 (HC)

Mustafa HussaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-27-1981

Reported in : AIR1981AP283

jayachandra reddy, j.1. the parliament, in furtherance of the directive principles enshrined in article 39(b) of the constitution of india, enacted the esso (acquisition of undertakings in india) act, 1974, the burmah shell (acquisition of undertakings in india) act, 1976 and the caltex (acquisition of shares of caltex oil refining (india) ltd. and of the undertakings in india of caltex (india) ltd.) act, 1977, hereinafter referred to as the esso acquisition act', 'the burmah shell acquisition act', 'the caltex acquisition act', respectively. the main object underlying each of these acts is to acquire the right, title and interest of the three major oil companies carrying on in india the business of distributing and marketing petroleum products with a view to subserve the common good. as per some of the provisions which are common to each of these acts, the right, title and interest of each of the oil companies in relation to its undertaking in india stood transferred and vested in the central government. section 5 of the esso acquisition act deals with leases and right of tenancies of the esso with third parties in respect of the properties existing on the appointed day, and lays down that they shall be deemed to have been transferred and vested in the central government. section 5(2) of the esso acquisition act provides that on the expiryof the term of. any. lease or tenancy, referred to in sub-section (i) such lease or tenancy shall, if so desired by the central government .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1981 (HC)

Prabhat Timber Depot and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-21-1981

Reported in : [1981]48STC159(AP)

alladi kuppuswami, c.j. 1. in this batch of writ petitions the main question for consideration is whether entry 145 of the first schedule to the andhra pradesh general sales tax act (referred to in this judgment as the act) is ultra vires and unconstitutional. 2. it is sufficient to state the facts in writ petition no. 3417 of 1977 in order to deal with the contentions raised by the petitioners in these writ petitions. 3. the petitioners in these writ petitions are dealers in timber. they usually purchase logs of timber from the forest department, saw or cut them into planks, rafters, beams, etc., and sell them. under entry 63 of the first schedule to the act, sales tax is leviable on timber at the point of first sale by a dealer in the state. the commercial tax department took the view that the forest department was not a 'dealer' and they were, therefore, levying tax on the sales effected by the persons, who purchased timber from the forest department and sold the same on the ground that they were first sales by dealers. in vajhala venkata ramana v. state of andhra pradesh ([1973] 31 s.t.c. 55.) this court held that the forest department was a 'dealer' and hence the sale by it must be considered to be the first sale liable to tax. this view was upheld by the supreme court on appeal. 4. another question that arose was whether timber cut and sold as planks, rafters, beams, etc., could be regarded as 'timber' within the meaning of entry 63 of the first schedule. till 1969 the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 1981 (HC)

K. Nagabhushanam and ors. Vs. Collector, Krishna Distirct and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-05-1981

Reported in : AIR1982AP123

p. ramachandra raju, j.1. bhavanipuram, patamata and gunadala are three gram panchayats constituted under the gram panchayats act in the vicinity of vijayawada municipality. these three panchayats come within the definition of local area as defined in sec. 2, sub-section (20) of the a. p. municipalities act, 1965 (hereinafter called the 'municipalities act') the government, by g. o. ms. no. 819 (municipal administration) dated 13-8-1979 issued under sec. 3 (1) (b) of the municipalities act, declared its intention to include the aforesaid local areas within the limits of vijayawada municipality and invited objections thereto from the residents of the local area or tax-payers of the municipality in accordance with s. 3 (2) of the municipalities act. the collector, krishna, by his proceedings, r.o.c. no. 9083/79-55 dated 14-8-1979 informed the gram panchayats that in view of the proposal to merge the local areas comprised in the gram panchayats in the vijayawada municipality, the notification constituting the three gram panchayats is proposed to be cancelled. he invited objections from the gram panchayats as contemplated by r. 12 (1) (2) of the a. p. gram panchayats (declaration of village) rules, 1969. the three gram panchayats filed their objections before the collector who, by his order r.o.c. no. 9083/79-s1, dated 27-9-1979, cancelled the notification constituting the above gram panchayats with effect from the afternoon of 30-9-1979. the government of andhra pradesh, in its .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1981 (HC)

Poddar Projects Ltd. (Multi Steels) Vs. the A.P.S.E. Board and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-10-1981

Reported in : AIR1982AP189

madhava reddy, j. 1. this batch of writ petitions by some of the mini steel plants of andhra pradesh are directed against the andhra pradesh state electricity board (for short electricity board) and the government of andhra pradesh. in most of the writ petitions, the petitioners pray that b. p. ms. no. 78 dated 20-1-1978 by which the revised tariff of 12.02 p per unit was applied to some of the mini steel plants named therein subject to the monthly minimum charges, be declared illegal, void and unenforceable as also cl, 41 of the terms and conditions of b. p. ms. no. 690 dt 17-9-75. in some, a writ of mandamus is sought to give effect to g. o. ms. no. 832 dated 2-11-1977 under which the government directed occasional power tariff at 0.11 p. per unit should be made available to five steel plants named in the g. o. for a period of three years from 1-11-1977 to 30-101980 an seek a consequential direction against the andhra pradesh state electricity board not to give effect to and proceed to collect the bills issued in derogation of that g.o. in some of the other writ-petitions, the petitioners pray for a direction to quash g. o. ms. no.146 irrigation and power dated 12-3-1979 by and under which, the government accepting the recommendation of the committee appointed by it, directed to withdraw the power tariff concesssions granted to mini steel plants in g. o. ms. 832 irrigation and power dated 2-11-1977.2. to appreciate the contentions raised in this batch of writ petitions, it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 10 1981 (HC)

Pujarla Venkaiah Vs. District Magistrate, Nalgonda and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-10-1981

Reported in : 1981CriLJ1534

punnayya, j.1. pujarla sambaiah, who is a student of law, law college, osmania university, was taken into custody on 5-3-1981 at hyderabad under an order of detention dated 1-3-1981 passed by the district magistrate, nalgonda, who is the first respondent herein, in exercise of the powers conferred on him under section 3(3) of the national security act. the detenu was served with the grounds of detention on 6-3-1981. the petitioner, who is the father of the detenu, filed this petition for the issuance of writ of habeas corpus quashing the orders of detention and set sambaiah at liberty forthwith. the grounds mentioned in the order of detention are four in number : 1. he is an active member of the extremist organisation called 'andhra pradesh reorganising committee,' wedded to violence by armed struggle and revolution, which committed 18 dacoities and 5 murders in nalgonda district. 2. he has organised the radical youth league and raithu cooli sangham in nalgonda in 1979-80 and instigated and misdirected the peasants and agricultural labourers to revolt against the land owners causing dislocation to agricultural economy. he also extracts money. he committed crime no. 13 of 1979 under sections 395 and 427 of the indian penal code of vemulapalli police station against a land owner when he refused to pay money. 3. pursuant to the violent revolutionary policy he has participated in three extremists dacoities in crime nos. 19 and 20 of 1980 of aravapalli police station in crime no. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1981 (HC)

S. Vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-28-1981

Reported in : (1982)IILLJ7AP

1. under the order impugned herein, the hindustan aeronautice ltd., has terminated the services of the petitioner by paying three months' basic pay in lieu of notice, as per paragraph 5 of the terms and conditions of appointment. according to the petitioner, the termination is really by way of punishment and that, the power sought to be invoked by the respondent-corporation is not available to it, in the facts and circumstances of this case. a few facts which are relevant for the present purpose may be stated : the petitioner was appointed as a medical officer in the respondent-corporation on 7th august, 1975. he was later confirmed in service and made permanent on 9th march, 1977. the order dated 9th march, 1977, stated, inter alia, that the petitioner will be on probation for a period of one year and that, during the probationary period, his services can be terminated without notice, without assigning any reasons and without any compensation in lieu of notice. it further stated : '... after the probationary period when your services are confirmed your services can be terminated by three months' notice in writing on either side or payment of three months salary (pay only) in lieu of notice. in case of shorter notice the liability will be restricted to the payment for the proportionate period, which falls short of the notice period. if during the notice period, you are absent without permission, your services can be terminated without notice.' this is clause (5) of the order .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //