SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(AP) 418

L.NARASIMHA REDDY, T.MEENA KUMARI
Peela Pothi Naidu – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


T. MEENA KUMARI, J.

( 1 ) SINCE the issues of facts and law involved in all these writ petitions are inter-related and arise out of a single Government Order, they are clubbed and heard together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 14110 of 2004 and W. P. No. 18791 of 2004 is Sri Peela pothi Naidu, Advocate whereas the petitioners in W. P. No. 1364 of 2005 are telugu Desam Party rep. by its Secretary sri Kadiam Srihari and Sri Ashok Gajapathi raju, former, Minister. In W. P. No. 1364 of 2005, a Freelance Journalist-Mr. ABK Prasad and several other Members of Legislative assembly got impleaded as respondents 4 to 14.

( 3 ) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 14110 of 2004 sought the relief of issuance of Quo warranto against the third respondent i. e. , sri Justice B. K. Somasekhara (Retd) and consequently to set aside the G. O. Ms. No. 58 iandcad (P. W. GV. 3) Department dated 22-6-2004 published in A. P. Gazette Part I extraordinary No. 243-C dated 22-6-2004 issued by the first respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and the provisions under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (for short the Act ) and violative of Articles





























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top