Donkaatchayamma vs. . K.Santhosha Rao

MAIN CASE NO: C.C.No.1880 OF 2021

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	03.11.2021	MSM,J
		Issue notice to respondents.
		Post after four (4) weeks.
		_______
		MSM,J<br>EPS

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P.No.20610 of 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
	21.12.2019	MSM,J
		Learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies
		seeks time to file counter. Time is extended for filing
		counter for a period of two (02) weeks.
		As seen from the petition,<br>the petitioner sought

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		interim direction to suspend the impugned order and
		during<br>hearing<br>the<br>learned<br>counsel<br>for<br>petitioner
		highlighted the action of the 2nd respondent in passing
		the order calling for report of Tahsildar.
		After<br>completion<br>of<br>enquiry<br>on<br>05-12-2019
		passing an order acting on discreet enquiry referred in
		page 5 of the order impugned in this Writ Petition is a
		serious irregularity and contrary to the principles laid
		down by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
		for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra
		Pradesh in W.P.Nos.22158 and 22190 of 2017, dated
		21-08-2018. Therefore, the order impugned in this
		Writ Petition is suspended for a period of two (02)
		months.
		In the meantime, the learned Government Pleader
		for Civil Supplies is<br>at liberty to file his counter.
		Post the matter after two (02) weeks.
		________<br>MSM, J
		IS

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.18307 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	18.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.18307 of 2019
		Issue notice to respondents Nos.2 and 3. The
		Standing Counsel for Endowments, takes notice for 3rd
		respondent.
		The learned Counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to 2nd respondent
		by RPAD and file proof service into the Registry within
		four weeks.
		________<br>MSM, J
		I.A No.1of 2019
		The petitioner is questioning G.O.Rt.No.1091
		issued by Revenue (Endowments II) Department, dated
		01.11.2019,<br>superseding<br>the<br>existing<br>trust<br>board,
		before expiry of tenure of two years, only on the
		ground that in view of amendment with effect from
		22.08.2019 to Section 17 of A.P Charitable and Hindu
		Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987,
		Endowments Department is competent to supersede
		the<br>existing<br>trust<br>board.<br>But<br>there<br>is<br>a<br>serious
		controversy about application of the G.O to already
		existing trust boards, more particularly whether it has
		got prospective or retrospective<br>effect<br>and thereby I
		find that there is prima facie case i.e. arguable case, in

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		favour of the petitioner. Hence, I find it is a fit case to
		grant interim order suspending the G.O for a period of
		one month.
		Accordingly,<br>G.O.Rt.No.1091,<br>Revenue
		(Endowments<br>II)<br>Department<br>dated<br>01.11.2019<br>is
		suspended<br>for<br>a<br>period<br>of<br>one<br>month.<br>In<br>the
		meanwhile the respondents are directed to file their
		counter.
		________<br>MSM, J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.18054 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	14.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.18054 of 2019
		Since<br>the<br>petitioner<br>is<br>questioning<br>the
		amendment to Section 17 of<br>the amended Act<br>31 of
		2019, vide G.O.Rt No.1100 dated 06.11.2019 which
		created services in Trust Board,<br>in the writ petition,
		the<br>Registry is<br>directed<br>to list<br>the matter<br>before
		appropriate<br>bench,<br>as<br>per<br>Roster,<br>after<br>obtaining
		permission from the Hon'ble Chief Justice.
		________<br>MSM, J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.18038 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	12.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.18038 of 2019
		Standing Counsel for 3rd<br>respondent temple,
		seeks time to obtain instructions from the concerned.
		Post on 19.11.2019.
		________<br>MSM, J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		There shall be an interim direction, not to
		dispossess the petitioner till 19.11.2019.
		________<br>MSM, J
		Note: Issue C.C today.<br>b/o.
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.17848 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	12.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.17848 of 2019
		Learned Assistant Government Pleader for
		Endowments takes notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
		Sri<br>G.<br>Ramana<br>Rao,<br>Standing<br>Counsel<br>for
		Endowments takes notice for 4th respondent.
		Issue notice to<br>unofficial<br>respondent Nos.5 to
		11. The learned Counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to respondent
		Nos.5 to 11 by RPAD and file proof of service into the
		Registry within two weeks.
		Post after two weeks.
		________
		MSM, J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		As<br>seen<br>from<br>the<br>material<br>on<br>record,
		respondent Nos.5 to 11 were appointed as members of
		trust board for Sri Yogabhogeswara Swamy Temple,
		Chippili village, Madanapalli Mandal, Chittoor District,
		on the recommendation made by P.V Midhun Reddy,
		Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha. His letter dated
		16.10.2019,<br>disclose<br>the<br>recommendation<br>for
		appointment of the following persons:
		1.B. Venkata Ramana, S/o.B.Akkulappa,
		2.G. Gangulappa, S/o.G. Obuleshu,
		3.M. Ravi Kanth Reddy, S/o.M. Rama Chandra Reddy,
		4. P. Sujatha, W/o.P. Jayanarayana Reddy,

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		5.B. Eswaramma, W/o.B. Akkulappa,
		6.D. Jaya Prakash, S/o.D. Anjanappa,
		7.T. Visweswara Prasad,
		8.M. Saradamma.
		Yet, another contention raised before this Court
		is that no antecedents enquiry was conducted to
		appoint respondent Nos.5 to 11 as required under
		G.O.Ms.No.258<br>Revenue<br>(Endowments-I)<br>dated
		31.03.1988 and Clause 6 (1)<br>directs the appointing
		authority to cause verification of antecedents, through
		the subordinate officers or the authority may himself
		verify the antecedents in case of those applications
		received in pursuance of the notification issued under
		Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 4. But no such antecedents
		enquiry was conducted,<br>according to the Counsel for
		the petitioner. However, it is evident from the record
		that<br>on<br>the<br>recommendation<br>of<br>the<br>Member<br>of
		Parliament,<br>Lok<br>Sabha,<br>these<br>appointments<br>were
		made, prima facie contrary to the law declared by this
		Court in W.P No.4522 of 2000 dated 10.04.2000.
		In<br>another<br>judgment<br>reported<br>in<br>Pagadala
		Pratap and another v. State of A.P represented by
		its Principal Secretary to Government, Department
		of Revenue (Endowments), Hyderabad and others
		in 2010 (4) ALT 510, the Single Judge of High Court of
		A.P at Hyderabad, observed as follows:
		"While<br>public<br>representatives,<br>be<br>they<br>MLAs<br>or<br>Ministers,<br>may<br>be<br>entitled<br>to<br>recommend persons whom they consider to<br>be entitled for appointment as trustees of

SL.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE
NO.		religious<br>institutions,<br>neither<br>can<br>they<br>dictate<br>these<br>persons<br>be<br>appointed<br>as<br>trustees nor can the competent authority<br>surrender its discretion and abdicate its<br>statutory duty of appointing only those<br>persons<br>as<br>trustees<br>who<br>satisfy<br>the<br>conditions prescribed in Act 30 of 1987,<br>and<br>the<br>Trustees<br>Rules.<br>Only<br>those<br>recommended by the Minster of Information<br>and Public Relations, as forwarded to him<br>by the local M.L.A, (other than the two who<br>were found ineligible), have been blindly<br>appointed as trustees without adhering to<br>the statutory provisions of Act 30 of 1987<br>or<br>the<br>statutory<br>rules<br>i.e.<br>the Trustees<br>Rules,<br>1987.<br>Appointing<br>those<br>recommended by the Minister as trustees is<br>evidently<br>at<br>his<br>dictates,<br>and<br>reflects<br>surrender of discretion and abdication of<br>duty<br>by<br>the<br>competent<br>authority.<br>The<br>impugned<br>G.O,<br>appointing<br>only<br>those<br>recommended<br>by<br>the<br>Minister<br>for<br>information<br>and<br>Public<br>Relations,<br>as<br>trustees without independent exercise of<br>mind is ultra vires.<br>In view of the principles laid down in the<br>above judgment, appointment of respondent Nos.5 to<br>11,<br>based<br>on<br>the<br>recommendation<br>made<br>by<br>P.V<br>Midhun Reddy, Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha by<br>his letter dated 16.10.2019 is an illegality, prima facie,<br>if they are not ineligible.<br>Therefore,<br>the<br>proceedings<br>in<br>Rc.No.D1/14027(31)/10/2019<br>dated<br>18.10.2019,<br>appointing respondent Nos. 5 to 11 as members of<br>trust board for Sri Yogabhogeswara Swamy Temple,<br>Chippili village, Madanapalli Mandal, Chittoor District<br>is hereby suspended for a period of two (2) months.	NOTE
		________<br>MSM, J<br>Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.17809 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	11.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.17809 of 2019
		Post on 18.11.2019.
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.
		In the meanwhile, considering his submissions, that
		in similar circumstances, in W.P No.12824 of 2019, this
		Court passed interim direction directing the respondents to
		restore the DIN number of the petitioner company; there
		shall be interim direction to the respondents to restore the
		DIN number of the petitioner company to enable it to
		discharge its statutory functions for all the companies
		which are classified as active.
		________<br>MSM, J<br>Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.17434 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	06.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.17434 of 2019
		Learned Government Pleader for respondent Nos.3
		and 4 contended that the petitioner is an employee and the
		matter must go to the Bench dealing with service matters.
		In view of the submission, the learned Government
		Pleader for respondent Nos.3 and 4, is directed to file an
		affidavit, verifying the fact that the petitioner was an
		employee under the respondents.
		Post on 11.11.2019.
		________
		MSM, J<br>Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.16572 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	02.11.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.16572 of 2019
		For filing counter by Assistant Government Pleader for Land
		Acquisition, post after two weeks.
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners Sri D. Krishna
		Murthy<br>and<br>Assistant<br>Government<br>Pleader<br>for<br>Land
		Acquisition.
		The<br>petitioners<br>sought<br>interim<br>direction,<br>not<br>to
		dispossess the petitioner from their lands in pursuant to
		the<br>preliminary<br>notification<br>No.A/14/2018<br>dated
		06.03.2018<br>issued<br>under<br>Section<br>11<br>and<br>declaration
		No.A/14/2018 dated 23.10.2018 issued under Section 19
		of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
		Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, Act 30 of
		2013, pending disposal of writ petition.
		The main grievance of the petitioner is that the Land
		Acquisition<br>Officer,<br>did<br>not<br>comply<br>the<br>mandatory
		requirement under Section 11 (1) (c) and (e) of Act 30 of
		2013, thereby their acquisition of the land itself is illegal.
		The basis for this<br>contention is the information, the
		petitioners obtained under Right to Information Act, from
		Gram Panchayat vide proceedings DT (1)/10/2019 dated
		28.09.2019 from Special Deputy Collector GNSS Unit – III
		Maddunuru. As per the information the respondents, did
		not comply Section 11 (1) (c) and (e) of Act 30 of 2013.
		Whereas, the respondents Counsel contended that every

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		rule for acquisition of land is complied and produced
		certain documents before this Court, during hearing and
		before filing counter in the main petition. The proceedings
		in<br>Rc.No.A/14/2018<br>dated<br>09.04.2018<br>is<br>relevant
		document which shows that the notification was published
		in Gram Panchayat, Tahsildar and Mandal Parishad Office,
		police<br>station<br>and<br>Sub-Registrar<br>Office<br>etc.,<br>so<br>also
		uploaded in the website. But it is a disputed question of
		fact and such question cannot be decided at this stage,
		without<br>inviting<br>counter,<br>since<br>the<br>entire<br>acquisition
		proceedings<br>vitiates<br>on<br>account<br>of<br>such<br>irregularity.
		Therefore, I find that it is appropriate to decide the main
		petition only after inviting counter, in view of the disputed
		question of fact, regarding publication of notification as
		mandated under Section 11 (1) (c) and (e) of Act 30 of 2013.
		However in view of the information furnished under Right to
		Information<br>Act,<br>referred<br>supra<br>discloses<br>that<br>the
		requirement is not complied prima facie. Having considered
		the facts and circumstances of the case and based on
		information collected under Right to Information Act, the
		respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioners
		from their land in pursuant to notification No.A/14/2018
		dated 23.10.2018 for a period of two months.
		In the meanwhile the respondents are directed to file
		their counter within two weeks from today, enabling this
		court to dispose of the main petition in accordance with
		law.
		________<br>MSM, J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.16762 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	25.10.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.16762 of 2019
		Implead<br>Smt.<br>Chandralekha,<br>member<br>of
		Udayasri Mahila Podupu Sangam as 4th respondent
		and issue notice to 4th<br>respondent, since she was
		already appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer<br>to Fair
		Price Shop No.1285110 of Anantapuramu Urban and
		Mandal.
		However,<br>the<br>order<br>impugned<br>in<br>the<br>writ
		petition is hereby suspended for a period of one
		month,<br>as<br>the<br>order<br>was<br>not<br>passed<br>by<br>the
		Committee<br>constituted<br>for<br>the<br>purpose<br>of
		recommending appointment of Fair Price Shop dealer
		in Annexure II of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted
		Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018.
		Post after two weeks.
		________
		MSM, J
		Rvk

SL.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE
NO.			NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.1125 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	24.10.2019	MSM,J
		Crl.R.C No.1125 of 2019
		Admit and notice.
		________<br>MSM, J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		This petition is filed under Section 397 (1) of
		Criminal Procedure Code, to suspend the substantive
		sentence of imprisonment and release the petitioner
		on bail.
		As seen from the record, the petitioner was
		on bail throughout the trial and during pendency of
		the appeal. Hence, I find it is a fit case to suspend
		the substantive sentence of imprisonment<br>in Crl.A
		No.487 of 2017 on the file of XII Additional District
		and Sessions Judge, Pithapuram.
		The substantive sentence of imprisonment is
		hereby suspended and the petitioner is ordered to be
		released<br>on<br>bail<br>on<br>execution<br>of<br>his<br>bond<br>for
		Rs.20,000/-<br>(Rupees Twenty Thousand Only)<br>with
		two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of
		Assistant Sessions Judge, Pithapuram.
		________<br>MSM, J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.15301 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.10.2019	MSM,J
		W.P No.15301 of 2019
		This<br>writ<br>petition<br>is<br>filed<br>seeking<br>writ<br>of<br>mandamus,<br>declaring the action of the respondent<br>Nos.4 and 5 in deducting the labour cess @ 1% of<br>the bills payable to the petitioner at the instance of<br>respondent Nos.1 to 3 as illegal, arbitrary and in<br>contravention<br>of<br>Memo<br>No.636/Reforms-A1/2008<br>dated 08.06.2011 and in contravention of Building<br>and other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act,<br>1996 and Rules made there under in agreement<br>No.07/2014-15 dated 30.05.2014.
		Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner<br>and<br>the<br>learned<br>Government<br>Pleader<br>for<br>Panchayatraj.
		Learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj<br>would submit that this matter is squarely covered by<br>the orders of this Court passed in W.P Nos.2369 of<br>2019 and 2372 of 2019 and 10084 of 2018 wherein<br>this Court granted interim direction.
		In view of the similar facts and circumstances<br>of the case, there shall be interim direction to the<br>respondents not to deduct 1% labour cess from the<br>bills of the petitioner unless the same has been<br>included in the estimates.<br>Post after two weeks.
		_______<br>MSM,J<br>Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.16537 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.10.2019	MSM,J
		At<br>request<br>for<br>filing<br>counter,<br>post<br>on
		04.11.2019.
		Issue notice to the respondent Nos.3 and 4.
		The<br>learned<br>Counsel<br>for<br>the<br>petitioner<br>is<br>also<br>permitted to take out personal notice through RPAD
		and file proof of service in the Registry within two
		weeks.<br>_______
		MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: W.P No.14389 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.10.2019	MSM,J
		At request of Government Pleader<br>for land
		acquisition, for filing counter, post after two weeks.
		It is brought to the notice of this Court that
		there is mistake in the cause title of 6th respondent,
		the Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to carry
		out the correction in the cause title, in the office of
		the Registry.<br>_______
		MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.A S.R No.4489 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	28.09.2019	MSM,J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		Leave granted. The I.A is accordingly, ordered.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		I.A No.2 of 2019
		The I.A is accordingly, ordered.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Crl.A S.R No.4489 2019
		Admit.
		_______<br>MSM,J<br>Rvk

DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: C.R.P No.2135 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	20.09.2019	MSM,J
		I.A No.2 of 2019
		Heard.
		For the reasons, stated in the accompanying
		affidavit filed in support of the petition,<br>filing of
		certified copy order and decree dated 25.06.2018 is
		dispensed with.
		The I.A is accordingly, ordered.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Criminal Petition No.4595 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	28.09.2019	MSM, J
		The main allegation against the Special Judge
		for SPE &<br>ACB cases at Nellore is that instead of
		recording examination in chief of the Investigating
		Officer, in the court, he took pen drive and the same
		is inserted in the computer and got print out. But the
		Counsel for the respondent, denied the allegation,
		while<br>contending<br>that<br>the<br>chief<br>examination<br>of
		Investigating Officer was commenced at 10.45 AM
		and completed by 7 PM on 06.09.2018. Thus, the
		assertion of the Counsel<br>for the respondent<br>is<br>that
		through out the day, only one witness was examined.
		In view, of<br>the<br>specific contention raised
		by the learned Counsel for the respondent,<br>the
		Registry is directed to call for report from the Special
		Judge for SPE &<br>ACB cases at Nellore, as to how
		many witnesses were examined on 06.09.2018 and
		how many<br>documents were marked, based on the
		dairy maintained in the office, within two weeks from
		today.
		List the matter on 14.10.2019.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE
NO.			NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Transfer Criminal Petition No.818 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	28.09.2019	MSM, J
		Notice.
		The learned Counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted<br>to<br>take<br>out<br>personal<br>notice<br>to<br>the
		respondent<br>Nos.2<br>to<br>4<br>by<br>registered<br>post<br>with
		acknowledgment with due and file proof of service in
		the Registry within three weeks.
		Post after three weeks.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Criminal Appeal No.9695 OF 2018

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Criminal Petition No.1069 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	28.09.2019	MSM, J
		Post the matter in usual course.
		b/o
		Rvk
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		This<br>petition<br>under<br>Section<br>397<br>(1)<br>of
		Criminal Procedure Code is filed to suspend the
		substantive sentence of imprisonment and enlarge
		this petitioner on bail.
		The case of the petitioner<br>is that, he was
		found guilty for the offence punishable under Section
		354<br>of Indian<br>Penal<br>Code<br>(for<br>short<br>I.P.C)<br>and
		sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a
		period of two years and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for
		the offence punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C.
		The<br>petitioner<br>has<br>paid<br>the<br>fine<br>amount
		before the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First
		Class, Nandigama, at the time of filing appeal against
		the conviction and sentence passed in C.C No.260 of
		2017. The petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A
		No.449<br>of<br>2017,<br>challenging<br>the<br>conviction<br>and
		sentence<br>passed<br>by<br>the<br>Additional<br>Judicial
		Magistrate of First Class, Nandigama in C.C No.260
		of 2017<br>and the sentence was suspended. Upon

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		hearing argument of both the counsel, considering
		the material available on record, the appellate court,
		confirmed<br>the<br>conviction<br>and<br>sentence<br>passed
		against this petitioner.
		It is the contention of the petitioner, that
		there are good grounds to succeed in the main appeal
		and requested to enlarge the petitioner, suspending
		the conviction and sentence passed against<br>this
		petitioner.
		Considering, the facts and circumstances of
		the case, the substantive sentence and imprisonment
		passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First
		Class, Nandigama in C.C No.260<br>of 2017<br>dated
		27.11.2017 is hereby suspended. The petitioner shall
		be enlarged on bail on his execution of bond for
		Rs.20,000/-<br>(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two
		sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of
		Additional<br>Judicial<br>Magistrate<br>of<br>First<br>Class,
		Nandigama.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Criminal Petition No.1071 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	28.09.2019	MSM, J
		Post the matter in usual course.
		b/o<br>Rvk
		I.A No.2 of 2019
		This<br>petition<br>under<br>Section<br>397<br>(1)<br>of
		Criminal Procedure Code<br>is filed to suspend the
		substantive sentence of imprisonment and enlarge
		this petitioner on bail.
		The case of the petitioner<br>is that,<br>he was
		found<br>guilty<br>for<br>the<br>offences<br>punishable<br>under
		Sections 403, 420, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code
		(for short I.P.C) and sentenced him to undergo simple
		imprisonment for a period of six months<br>simple
		imprisonment<br>for<br>the<br>offence<br>punishable<br>under
		Section<br>403<br>of<br>I.P.C,<br>six<br>months<br>simple
		imprisonment<br>and<br>Rs.500/-<br>fine<br>for<br>the<br>offence
		punishable under Section 420 of I.P.C, six months
		simple<br>imprisonment<br>and<br>Rs.500/-<br>fine<br>for<br>the
		offence punishable under Section 468 of I.P.C and six
		months<br>simple<br>imprisonment<br>for<br>the<br>offence
		punishable under Section 471 of I.P.C.
		The<br>petitioner<br>has<br>paid<br>the<br>fine<br>amount
		before<br>the<br>Judicial<br>Magistrate<br>of<br>First<br>Class,

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		Srikakulam, at the time of filing appeal against the
		conviction and sentence passed in C.C No.751 of
		2014. The petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A
		No.90<br>of<br>2016<br>challenging<br>the<br>conviction<br>and
		sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First
		Class, Srikakulam in C.C No.751 of 2014 and the
		sentence was suspended. Upon hearing argument of
		both the counsel, considering the material available
		on<br>record,<br>the<br>appellate<br>court,<br>confirmed<br>the
		conviction<br>and<br>sentence<br>passed<br>against<br>this
		petitioner.
		It is the contention of the petitioner,<br>that
		there are good grounds to succeed in the main appeal
		and requested to enlarge the petitioner, suspending
		the conviction and sentence passed against this
		petitioner.
		Considering, the facts and circumstances of
		the case, the substantive sentence and imprisonment
		passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
		Srikakulam in C.C No.751 of 2014 dated 07.09.2016
		is hereby suspended. The petitioner shall be enlarged
		on bail on his execution of bond for Rs.20,000/-
		(Rupees Twenty Thousand)<br>with two sureties for a
		like<br>sum<br>each<br>to<br>the<br>satisfaction<br>of<br>Judicial
		Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Criminal Petition No.4795 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	27.09.2019	MSM, J
		Notice before admission.
		The learned counsel for the petitioners is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd
		respondent by registered post with acknowledgment
		due and file proof of service in the registry within
		three weeks.
		Post after three weeks.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.1000 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		At request, post on 24.09.2019.
		b/o.<br>Rvk
2.	27.09.2019	MSM, J
		Notice before admission.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also<br>permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd<br>respondent by registered post with acknowledgment<br>due and file proof of service in the registry within<br>three weeks.
		Post after vacation.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		There shall be interim suspension of order<br>dated 13.10.2017 C.C No.246 of 2017 passed by the<br>Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bapatla<br>and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail<br>on execution of his bond for Rs.20,000/-<br>(Rupees<br>Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties for a like<br>sum each to the satisfaction of Additional Judicial<br>Magistrate of First Class, Bapatla.
		________<br>MSM,J<br>Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.932 OF 2019

DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
23.09.2019	MSM,J
	No representation, post on 24.09.2019.
	b/o.<br>Rvk
24.09.2019	MSM,J
	I.A No.1 of 2019
	Heard.
	For the reasons, stated in the accompanying
	affidavit filed in support of the petition, the delay of
	10 days in representing Crl.R.C.SR No.6434 of 2019
	is condoned.
	The I.A is accordingly, ordered.
	MSM,J
	I.A No.2 of 2019
	The learned counsel for the petitioners is also
	permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd
	respondent by registered post with acknowledgment
	due and file proof of service in the registry within
	four weeks.
	List after four weeks.
	_______
		_______<br>Notice.<br>MSM,J<br>Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.999 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	24.09.2019	MSM,J
		Notice before admission.
		The learned counsel for the petitioners<br>is
		also permitted to take out personal notice to the 1st
		respondent through RPAD and file proof of service in
		the registry within three weeks.
		List immediately after vacation.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		There shall be interim suspension of order in
		Tr.Crl.M.P No.6 of 2019 dated 25.07.2019 on the file
		of Principal District Judge, Ongole.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.1003 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	24.09.2019	MSM,J
		Issue notice.
		The learned counsel for the petitioners<br>is
		also permitted to take out personal notice to the 1st
		respondent through RPAD and file proof of service in
		the registry within three weeks.
		List immediately after vacation.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		There shall be interim suspension of order in
		Tr.Crl.M.P No.6 of 2019 dated 25.07.2019 on the file
		of Principal District Judge, Ongole.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.1006 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	24.09.2019	MSM,J
		Notice before admission.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to the<br>1st
		respondent by registered post with acknowledgment
		due and file proof of service in the registry within
		three weeks.
		List after three weeks.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.946 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		Notice
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to the 1st
		respondent by registered post with acknowledgment
		due and file proof of service in the registry within
		three weeks.
		List on 18.10.2019.
		________<br>MSM, J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.966 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		No representation, post on 18.10.2019.
		b/o
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.958 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		Notice before admission.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd
		respondent by registered post with acknowledgment
		due and file proof of service in the registry within
		three weeks.
		List on 18.10.2019.
		________<br>MSM, J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		This petition, is allowed, subject to furnishing
		certified copy of the order within one month. In the
		event of failure to furnish certified copy, the main
		revision shall be rejected automatically.
		________<br>Rvk<br>MSM, J

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.990 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		Notice.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to the 1st
		respondents by registered post with acknowledgment
		due<br>and file proof of service in the registry within
		three weeks.
		List on 18.10.2019.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.991 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
	Notice before admission.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted<br>to<br>take<br>out<br>personal<br>notice<br>to<br>the
		respondent<br>Nos.1<br>to<br>9<br>by<br>registered<br>post<br>with
		acknowledgment due and file proof of service in the
		registry within one week.
		List on 01.10.2019.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.992 OF 2019

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.994 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019<br>MSM,J<br>Rule nisi. Call for records.
		Notice returnable in three weeks.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take out personal notice to<br>2nd<br>RPAD
		respondent by registered post with acknowledgment
		due<br>and file proof of service in the registry within
		three weeks.
		List on 18.10.2019.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.996 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		Notice.
		The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted to take notice to the counsel appearing for
		the respondent/complainant in Crl.M.P No.972 of
		2019 in C.C No.105 of 2019 on the file of Judicial
		Magistrate of First Class, Railway Kodur.
		List on 30.09.2019.
		_______
		MSM,J<br>RVK

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.957 OF 2019

1.	23.09.2019	MSM,J
		I.A No.1 of 2019
		This petition, is allowed, subject to furnishing
		certified copy of the order within one month. In the
		event of failure to furnish certified copy, the main
	revision shall be rejected automatically.
		________<br>Rvk<br>MSM, J
		I.A No.2 of 2019
		This petition is filed to suspend the orders passed
		by the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First
		Class, Ongole in DVC No.19 of 2014 and confirmed
		by the appellate court i.e. VII Additional District &
		Sessions Judge, Ongole in Crl. Appeal No.107 of
		2016, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay
		maintenance<br>@<br>Rs.5,000/-<br>per<br>month<br>and<br>pay
		compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-<br>(Rupees One Lakh
		only).
		Considering the facts and circumstances of
		the case, the order to the extent of payment of half of
		the compensation is suspended for a period of one
		month,<br>while<br>directing<br>the<br>petitioner<br>to<br>pay
		maintenance as directed by the trial court in DVC
		No.19<br>of<br>2014<br>and<br>Rs.50,000/-<br>towards
		compensation to the respondent, within two weeks

from the date of order. In the<br>event of failure to
comply any of the directions of the order, the petition
shall stand dismissed automatically.
The<br>counsel<br>for<br>the<br>petitioner<br>herein<br>is
permitted to furnish a copy of the order before the III
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole.
________<br>Rvk<br>MSM, J
Note:
Issue C.C by tomorrow.
B/O<br>Rvk

MAIN CASE NO: Crl.R.C No.1011 OF 2019

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
1.	23.09.2019<br>MSM,J
		Notice before admission.
	The learned counsel for the petitioner is also
		permitted<br>to<br>take<br>out<br>personal<br>notice<br>to<br>the
		respondents 1 to 3 through RPAD and file proof of
		service in the registry within two weeks.
		List on 18.10.2019.
		_______<br>MSM,J
		RVK

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU

1.	Whether Reporters of Local newspapers<br>may be allowed to see the Judgments ?	Yes/No
2.	Whether the copies of judgment may be<br>Marked to Law Reporters/Journals ?	Yes/No
3.	Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish<br>To see the fair copy of the Judgment ?	Yes/No

Copyist