Dismissed

The Thandava Sugars Karmika Union v. Govt. of a.P., Industries and Commerce and 2 Ors.

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Aug 2024WP/4696/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is a final order dismissing a writ petition (No. 4696 of 2005) filed by a sugar workers union against the Government. The court accepted counsel's submission and dismissed the petition as infructuous without adjudication on merits or costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous; no order as to costs.

The Thandava Sugars Karmika Union Vs Govt… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 4696 OF 2005

¶7

Between:

¶8

The Thandava Sugars Karmika Union, with Regd.No.D1892/2001 rep.by its General Secretary, D.Naryana Swamy, S/o.Appa Rao, R/o.Paltheru, Payakaraopet Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Govt, of A.P., Industries And Commerce & 2 Others, rep.by its Secretary, Industries and Commerce (Sugars) Dept.,^Governmentof A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Director of Sugar and Cane Commissioner, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Near L.B.Stadium, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Thandava Co.op Sugars Limited, Payakaraopet, Visakhapatnam rep.by its Managing Director,

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

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 particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing the G.O.Ms.No.220 Industries and commerce (sugar) Dept dt.4-102004 as illegal arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and set

¶16

2004 as illegal arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to pay the bonus to its employees under the provisions of Bonus Act, 1965 from 199798 to till today and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶17

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2005fWPMP. NO: 6272 OF 20051

¶18

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 suspend the operation of the G.O.Ms.No.220 Industries and commerce (Sugar) Dept., dt.4-10-2004 issued by the 1st respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI. VV N NARAYANA RAO

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1& 2: GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : S CHAKRAPANI

¶22

The Court made the following order:

¶23

APHC010349562005

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶25

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

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO: 4696/2005

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

THE THANDAVA SUGARS KARMIKA UNION ...PETITIONER

¶31

AND

¶32

GOVT OF A P INDUSTRIES AND ...RESPONDENT(S) COMMERCE 2 ORS AND OTHERS

¶33

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER:

¶34

1.VVN NARAYANA RAO

¶35

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT(S):

¶36

1.S CHAKRAPANI

¶37

2.GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE

¶38

The Court made the following Order:

¶39

Sri V.V.N. Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶40

submits that the cause in the writ petition does not^surviveany

¶41

further and the matter does not require adjudication^onitsmerits.

¶42

Recording the said submission, the writ petition is^dismissed

¶43

as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

¶45

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand^closed.

¶46

Sd/- P.U.V.BHASKAR RAO //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶47

SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To,

¶49

One CC to SRI. VV N NARAYANA RAO Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

One CC to SRI. S CHAKRAPANI Advocate [OPUC]

¶51

Two CCs to GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, High Court^Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶52

Three CD Copies.

GVN WP(S)

HIGH COURT

DATED:09/08/2024

ORDER

WP.No.4696 of 2005

X 1 s MAR 2025 |
. Current Section

¶61

DISMISSING THE WP

¶62

AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶63

WITHOUT COSTS

The Thandava Sugars Karmika Union v. Govt. of a.P., Industries and Commerce and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Thandava Sugars Karmika Union v. Govt. of a.P., Industries and Commerce and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Venkatesh Reddy, Chittoor District. Vs the Commissioner of Endowments Dept.Hyd.and 4 Others

Ch. Suryanarayana Raju. Vs the Commissioner of Technical and 2 Others

B.Nageswar Rao Died Vs The Manager A.P.S.R.T.C

M.Venkata Reddy, Kadapa District and 3 Others Vs the V.C. and M.D., Apiic.

Mr.Mathi Venkateshwara Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Surapaneni Murali, Krishna, Krishna Dist. Vs the v.C., and M.D., Apsrtc., Hyd. and 2 Othrs