Disposed

M.Ranganatha Prasad, Kurnool District and 7 Others v. Prl Secy, Agri. and Coop Dept, Hyderabad and 2 Others

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Aug 2024WP/29036/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired cooperative bank employees challenged retirement notices issued at age 58, contrary to proceedings enhancing retirement age to 60. An interim order had already directed their continuance in service; holding no surviving cause for adjudication, the High Court closed the writ petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed with no order as to costs; interim continuation in service already operative; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

M.Ranganatha Prasad, Kurnool District and 7… — Cooperative Societies | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 29036 OF 2015

¶7

Between;

¶8

M.Ranganatha Prasad, S/o. M.Suryanarayana, Hindu, aged about 59 years, Occ; Retd. Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool, R/o. U.Kothapalli, Dhone Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶9

K.Narayana Rao, S/o. Venkateswara rao, Hindu, Aged about 59 years, Occ. Retd. Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool, R/o. H.No.30/726, B60, Bommala Satram, Nandyal, Kurnool District.

¶10

T.C.V.V.S. Govindaiah, S/o. T.Veeraiah, Hindu, Aged about 59 years, Occ; Retd. Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool R/o. Pan Savidi,

¶11

Panyam, Kurnool District.

¶12

K.Murali Babu Gupta, S/o. Krishna Murthy, Hindu, Aged about 59 years, Occ: Retd. Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool R/o. 52/114 Upstair,

¶13

King Market, Kurnool, Kurnool District

¶14

M.Ramudu, S/o. Pullaiah, Hindu, aged about 59 years, Occ: Retd. Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool, R/o. 9/287-B, Near Masumbasha

¶15

Darga Kurnool, Kurnool District.

¶16

N.Muniswamy, S/o. N.Pullaiah, Hindu aged 59 years, Occ; Retd. Asst.

¶17

General Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool R/o. C/o. KDCC Bank

¶18

Krishna Branch, Krishnanagar, Kurnool, Kurnool District.

¶19

G.Thimma Reddy, S/o. Mahadeva Reddy, Hindu, Aged^59years,Occ: Retd. Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool, R/o. H.No.27, Maruthi Nagar, Nandikotkur Road, Kullur Mandal, Kurnool District.

¶20

V.Bal Raju, S/o. Venkataramaiah, Hindu, aged 59^{years,Occ:Retd.} Asst. Manager, K.D.C.C.Bank, Kurnool, R/o. 50/753/32, Upstairs, Behind Sujata Book stall, Tagore Nagar, Kurnool, Kurnool^District.

¶21

...Petitioners

¶22

AND

¶23

State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its PrI. Secretary, Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶24

The Commissioner for Cooperation and Registrar of. Cooperative Societies Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶25

The Kurnool District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Kurnool, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer, Kurnool District.

¶26

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more fully^{oneinthenatureof} Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing retirement notice to the petitioners is illegal, improper, arbitrary contrary to Act 4 of 2014 dated 27-06-2014 and also in violation of proceedings dated 10-08-2015 12-08-2015 and 22-08-2015 and set aside the same consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in service in view of the proceedings dated 10-08-2015, 12-08-2015^{and22-08-2015.}

¶27

¶28

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶29

Petition under Rule 12(11) of writ proceedings rules 1977 r/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave for filing counter affidavit in the writ petition No.29036/2015.

¶30

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WVMP. NO: 3915 OF 20151

¶31

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders granted on 08.09.2015 in W.P.M.P No.37641 of 2015 in W.P.No.29036 of 2015 and dismiss the writ the petition in the interest of Justice.

¶32

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2015rWPMP. NO: 37641 OF 20151

¶33

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to continue the petitioners in service in accordance with Act 4 of 2014 pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice.

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K CHAITANYA

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: KOTESWARA RAO MUMMANENI

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR AGRICULTURE (AP)

¶37

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶38

APHCP10329812015

¶39

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶40

[3333]

¶41

FRIDAY .THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶42

PRESENT

¶43

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶44

WRIT PETITION NO: 29036/2015

¶45

Between:

¶46

M.ranganatha Prasad, Kurnool District & 7 Others and Others

¶47

...PETITIONER(S)

¶48

AND

¶49

PrI Secy Agri Coop Dept Hyderabad 2 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶50

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶51

1.KCHAITANYA

¶52

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶53

1.KOTESWARA RAO MUMMANENI

¶54

2.GP FOR AGRICULTURE (AP)

¶55

The Court made the following:

¶56

ORDER:

¶57

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article²²⁶ of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶58

“...to issue a writ, order or direction more fully^one In the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in^{issuingretirementnoticeto} the petitioners is illegal, improper, arbitrary contrary^{toAct4of2014dated21-} 06-2014 and also in violation of proceedings dated^{10-08-2015,12-08-2015and} 22-08-2015 and set aside the same consequently direct^{therespondents} to continue the petitioner in service in view of the proceedings^{dated10-08-2015,} 12-08-2015 and 22-08-2015... ”

¶59

When the matter came up for admission on 08.09.2015,^thisCourthas

¶60

passed the following interim order;

¶61

“ In view of the proceedings dated 10.08.2015 issued^{bytheAndhraPradesh} Co-operative Bank’s Association, unanimously resolving to enhance the retirement age limit from 58 years to 60 years, there shall be^{interimdirectiontotherespondents} to continue the petitioners in service until orders."

¶62

In view of the interim order passed by this Court on^{08.09.2015,this} Court is of the opinion that the cause in the writ^{petitiondoesnotsurvivefor}

¶63

further adjudication.

¶64

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall^{benoorderasto} costs.

¶65

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ^{Petitionshallstand} closed.

¶66

//TRUE COPY//

¶67

SD/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT^GISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶68

To,

¶69

One CC to SRI K CHAITANYA Advocate [OPUC]

¶70

One CC to SRI KOTESWARA RAO MUMMANENI Advocate [OPUC]

¶71

Two CCs to GP FOR AGRICULTURE of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶72

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED: 02/08/2024

ORDER

WP.No.29036 of 2015

CLOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

M.Ranganatha Prasad, Kurnool District and 7 Others v. Prl Secy, Agri. and Coop Dept, Hyderabad and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Ranganatha Prasad, Kurnool District and 7 Others v. Prl Secy, Agri. and Coop Dept, Hyderabad and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Uma Devi, Anantapuram Dist Vs Prl Secy, W and Cw Dept, Hyd and 5 Others

E. Sreenivasa Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

E.Venkata Ramana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri P.Adianrayana Murthy, E.G.Dist Vs Prl Secy, Agrl and Coop Dept, Hyd and 3 Others

V.Jagadish, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

D.M., Apsrtc, W.G. Dist. Vs D.V. Ramana Rao and Ano.