Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.60 seconds)
Documents citing Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh And Another vs R.K. Ragala And Another on 31 January, 1994

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, vs T Varahalu on 23 August, 2022

Learned counsel submits that this aspect was also noticed by the learned single Judge. The community of the father will have a bearing on the community claimed by the offspring and not vice versa. It is submitted that the learned single Judge clearly held that there is non-application of mind by the 1st appellate authority and that no reasons were produced for brushing aside the evidence adduced by the 1st respondent. He also relies upon Government of A.P. and Another v R.K. Ragala and another11 to submit that repeated enquiries cannot be held into the same issue. Therefore, he submits that there are no merits in the Writ Appeal and the same should be dismissed. COURT:-
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - P K Mishra - Full Document

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, vs T Varahalu on 28 July, 2022

Learned counsel submits that this aspect was also noticed by the learned single Judge. The community of the father will have a bearing on the community claimed by the offspring and not vice versa. It is submitted that the learned single Judge clearly held that there is non-application of mind by the 1st appellate authority and that no reasons were produced for brushing aside the evidence adduced by the 1st respondent. He also relies upon Government of A.P. and Another v R.K. Ragala and another11 to submit that repeated enquiries cannot be held into the same issue. Therefore, he submits that there are no merits in the Writ Appeal and the same should be dismissed. COURT:-
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - P K Mishra - Full Document

T.Varahalu vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 17 October, 2019

In support of his contention, he placed his reliance on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in Government of A.P. and 1 2015 (3) ALD 617 6 MGR, J W.P.No.17667 of 2004 another v. R.K. Ragala and another2, wherein it is held that a citizen is entitled to live with dignity and without being harassed by repeated enquiries. Based on the Committee's report, the District Collector cancelled the community certificate of the petitioner. The first respondent, being a statutory appellate authority, has to independently consider the entire evidence available on record. The first respondent appellate authority was carried away by the orders of the District Collector, which are under appeal and also District Level Scrutiny Committee report. The Community Certificate issued on 23.06.1977, the voters list of 1980, and also the petitioner's Transfer Certificate show that the petitioner belongs to konda kapu (ST) community. But, these documents are not weighed with the authorities. However, respondent Nos.1 and 2 have taken into consideration only the birth and death registers of people whose surname is 'Tade'. The authorities recording the birth and deaths are not competent to record community of the person even if they recorded the community or social status of the person is not conclusive proof. However, it is weighed with the authorities and cancelled the certificate of the petitioner.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - M G Rao - Full Document

Kothapalli Gladya Jacob vs Commissioner Of Tribal Welfare, ... on 13 December, 2001

8. The mere fact that there was a 'de novo' enquiry against the late father of the petitioner will not invalidate the social status certificates which were issued earlier after conducting enquiries in accordance with law and based on evidence produced at that point of time. A Division Bench of this court in GOVT. OF A.P. v. R.K. RAGALA, , has quashed the show cause notice itself proposing a 'de novo' enquiry. The Division Bench of this Court has held that once a social status certificate was issued after valid enquiries, further successive enquiries against the certificate holder amounts to harassment and offends Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Following the judgments of the Apex Court and the Division of this Court, this Court has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the enquiries concluded during 1984 to 1991 in connection with the social status of the petitioner are valid and cannot be a subject-matter of 'de novo' enquiry The impugned proceeding Ref. B2-12038/92, dated 30-10-1993 on the file of the Callectorate, Kakinada is an error apparent on the face of the record and is accordingly quashed. There shall be a declaration that the petitioner belongs to 'VALMIKI' Scheduled Tribe and she shall be entitled to all the rights and benefits that flow from that social status.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - I Venkatanarayana - Full Document

Polam Veerabhadra Rao vs The Government Of A.P. And Others on 22 January, 1996

3. Sri Nalin Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner primarily contended that the petitioner was subjected to enquiries on earlier occasion also by the Criminal Investigation Department (C.I.D.) and a detailed report was also prepared by the said department. It is alleged that in cases of social status claim, there cannot be numerous enquiries as it would cause hardship to the petitioner. It is further stated that a Division Bench of this Court in Govt. of Andhra Pradesh v. R. K. Ragala, has held that several enquiries in respect of social status claim of a person are not warranted. Therefore, it is urged that in view of this decision, the show-cause notice issued by the third respondent is not tenable.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1