Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
M. S. Liberhan, C. J., *V. V. S. Rao, J.
Sathi Reddy D. v. Commissioner Panchayat Raj Hyderabad and Others
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the appeals (Para 1) |
| 2. explanation of charges made against the petitioner (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observations on judicial procedure (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. nature of powers under s.249 of the act (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. principles of natural justice and necessity of supplying the enquiry report (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. judicial review limitations and errors (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. requirement of issuing adequate notice and opportunity (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 8. conclusion and remand of the case (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
1.These two Writ Appeals are against the same judgment of the learned single Judge dated 24-9-1998 in Writ Petition No. 24801 of 1998. The Writ Appeal No. 1805 of 1998 is filed by the petitioner in the said writ petition. The Writ Appeal No. 1826 of 1998 is filed by the respondent Nos. 5 to 9 in the said writ petition. The parties are referred to herein as they were arrayed in the writ petition. A few facts which are necessary for the disposal of these writ appeals are as follows :
The petitioner (appellant in Writ Appeal No. 1805 of 1998) was elected as Sarpanch of the Peerzadiguda Gram Panchayat for a second consecutive term. He
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
