High Court Logo
The Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur

Sri Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur
The Hon'ble The Chief Justice

"Learn to live in this world with self-respect". For Original Handwritten Constitution Click Here

HC Background2

Notifications

High Court Calendar

HC Background3

Associated Links

Landmark Judgments

Landmark Judgments

HC Background4

W.P.(C) No. 493/2022

SUBHASH DESAI VS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA

 The Supreme Court held that the Speaker must recognise the whip and leader of the legislature party as appointed by the concerned political party. In the event of a split, the Speaker can decide if MLAs of any faction ought to be disqualified and the Election Commission can decide who can use the party’s symbol. Both these decisions can be taken concurrently and neither the Speaker nor the Election Commission needs to wait for the other’s decision.The Supreme Court held that except in extraordinary cases, neither the High Courts nor the Supreme Court can decide disqualification proceedings under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. The Court further held that an MLA had the right to participate in legislative proceedings while disqualification petitions are pending against them and the validity of decisions taken by the legislature cannot be questioned merely because disqualification petitions were pending against certain members.The Supreme Court ruled that a Governor is only justified in calling a person to prove their majority on the floor of the legislature if the Governor has reasons to believe, based on objective material, that such a person has lost the confidence of the majority of the legislature.On the issue of whether the Speaker can decide disqualification proceedings when a notice for the Speaker’s removal is pending, the correctness of the decision in Nabam Rebia was referred to a larger Bench of seven judges. Until the issue is decided by seven judges, the Court held that the Speaker has the authority to examine whether a motion for their removal was genuine or merely intended to stop them adjudicating disqualification proceedings. If the Speaker found the removal motion to be genuine, then they could pause the disqualification proceedings till the decision on the Speaker’s removal was concluded. Else, the Speaker could reject the motion. The judgment of the Court was unanimous and authored by Chief Justice Chandrachud.

View Full Judgment
eAPHCR

eAPHCR

HC Background5

March 30 1961

WP/145/1959

Hon'ble Justice P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. N. WANCHOO, K. C. DAS GUPTA , J. C. SHAH AND N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR

M. A. RAHMAN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH


March 30 1961

WP/145/1959

Honourable Judge P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. N. WANCHOO, K. C. DAS GUPTA , J. C. SHAH AND N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR

M. A. RAHMAN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH


HC Background6

August 30 2024

WP/21914/2021

Hon'ble Justice K MANMADHA RAO

Gaddala Jhonson Babu Vs. The State Bank of India


August 30 2024

WP/21914/2021

Honourable Judge K MANMADHA RAO

Gaddala Jhonson Babu Vs. The State Bank of India


HC Image

Did you know?

Hon'ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar

Hon'ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar

The First Acting Chief Justice of High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravati

Born on 26.02.1961 at Hyderabad. Had his school education (Class-I to Class-X) at Little Flower High School, Hyderabad. Passed intermediate from Little Flower Junior College and B.Sc from Nizam College, Hyderabad. Obtained Law degree from University College of Law, Osmania University, Hyderabad. Enrolled as an Advocate on the rolls of Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh on 28.02.1986 and joined the office of Sri C.Padmanabha Reddy. Actively practiced on criminal side and also in Constitutional matters. Had developed independent practice in short span. Elevated as Additional Judge of A.P. High Court on 29.06.2012. Appointed as Judge of High Court of Andhra Pradesh and assumed charge as such on 04.12.2013.
Appointed as acting Chief Justice of High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 1 January 2019.