ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Punnayya, J
Sri K. Tirupati – Appellant
Versus
Sri Shankar Rao Bowgikar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the 2nd respondent's background and appointment details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments for and against the appointment validity. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. legal framework and analysis relevant to the appointment validity. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. citations and precedents relevant to the case. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. final conclusion on validity of the appointment. (Para 15 , 16) |
1. The 2nd respondent, Sri Shankar Rao Bowgikar, was a Lower Division Clerk in the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. He is a law graduate. He has also a Post - Graduate Diploma in LSGD.
2. A Court has been specially constituted to deal with the cases arising under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. In fact, its entire expenditure, including the pay and allowances of the Magistrate, is borne by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. It is now called the VII Metropolitan Magistrate's Court. There was a Court Inspector in that Court appointed by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad to conduct cases arising under the , and one Madhava Rao was working as the Court Inspector. He was promoted as Superintendent. In his place the 2
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.