Retired cooperative department employees sought a declaration that failure to act on their representation was arbitrary. With no representation on three listing dates, the writ petition transferred from the AP Administrative Tribunal was dismissed for default, with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION TRANSFERED FROM APAT NO: 80 OF 2022
Between:
...PetitionerfS)
AND
...Respondents
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 declare that the action of the respondents in not passing appropriate orders on the representation dt-11-12-2017 filed by the
applicants is illegal, arbitrary and is violative of articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
1A NO: 1 OF 2022
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 permit the applicants to file a common OA as their cause of action, relief and respondents are one and same in main OA and have paid Rs.50/- each towards court fee.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s) ISRI. M SRINIVASA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent hJo’S 1 to 3: GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following : ORDER
APHC010020352022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3459]
FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION TRANSFERED FROM APAT NO: 80/2022
Between:
K.rajaiah, and Others
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.M SRINIVASA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following:
3
W.P.(AT).No;80 of 2022
ORDER:
As there was no representation for the petitioners on 05.01.2023, and 18.09.2024, the matter was directed to be listed on 01.10.2024. On 01.10.2024 also there was no representation for the petitioners, hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption‘fordismissal’.Even today, there is no representation for the petitioners. It appears that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the case.
Therefore, this Writ Petition (AT) is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pendingshallstandclosed.
Sd/- V SATYANARAYANA //TRUE COPY// DEPUTY REGISTRAR
To
SECTION OFFICER
3. THREE CD Copies
BKB
HIGH COURT
DATED: 04/10/2024
ORDER
WP(AT).No.80 of 2022
g^ANBH:
12 MAR 2125
. Current Section
DISMISSING OF THE WP FOR DEFAULT WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for default due to repeated non-representation by the petitioners.
K.Rajaiah
D.Nagamma
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary (Cooperative), Food and Agriculture, Cooperation Department
The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Chittoor
The District Collector, Chittoor
Sumathi Jagadam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
