This Writ Appeal challenged a Clarificatory Order passed by a single judge regarding an appellant's right to sell hot badam milk prepared from Vijaya Dairy supplied components. The High Court held there was no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.
The writ appeal was dismissed.
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.
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR
WRIT APPEAL NO.999 OF 2012
Dt: 14-08-2012.
Between: M.ESWARA REDDY .. APPELLANT AND V.MALLIKARJUNA AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR
WRIT APPEAL NO.999 OF 2012
JUDGMENT: (Per THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE)
It appears in this matter the grievance of the appellant is with regard to an order passed by the Hon’ble single Judge on 28-01-2011 in W.P.No.1368 of 2011, which was filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in APSRTC No.M1/03/122(9)/10-ATP, dated 19.01.2011 issued by the 1st respondent therein interpreting the orders in W.P.No.15454 of 2009 passed on 12.07.2010 in a different manner as arbitrary, illegal and violating Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and to set aside the same. Consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the business activity of the petitioner in selling the products of Vijaya Milk and Vijaya Dairy Products including hot badam milk in terms of proceedings dated 16.4.2009 and 2.7.2009 issued by the General Manager, A.P. Dairy Development Cooperative Federation Limited, Anantapur Milk Shed, Anantapur District. In W.P.No.1368 of 2011 it appears that the issue was only that the 1st respondent was threatening to prevent the writ petitioner from selling badam milk.
It appears earlier W.P.No.25454 of 2009 was moved by the present appellant in which an order was passed on 20-07-2010, wherein the court held as follows:
“ In my opinion, while the petitioner is entitled to sell all Vijaya dairy milk products, in the guise of such a right, he cannot prepare badam milk by himself. However, so long as the petitioner sells hot badam milk prepared by Vijaya dairy, the respondents shall not interfere with such activity.”
It appears that subsequent thereto another writ petition was moved being W.P.No.18785 of 2010, which was also filed by the present appellant. The said writ petition was disposed of on 24-12-2010 specifically directing respondents 1 to 3 not to allow the 4th respondent therein to sell the products other than Vijaya Dairy Milk Products during the subsistence of the contract.
Subsequent thereto, W.P.No.1368 of 2011 has been filed and it appears that the Hon’ble single Judge held by using the expression “so long as the petitioner sells hot badam milk prepared by Vijaya dairy” as follows:
“ this Court never intended that the petitioner is precluded from mixing the products of Vijaya Dairy in his premises and serving the same to the customers, after heating the mixed component. What this Court intended was that in the guise of selling the Vijaya Products, the petitioner cannot prepare the Badam Milk from out of the products supplied by any of the agencies other than Vijaya Dairy. So long as the badam powder and milk are supplied by Vijaya Dairy, the respondents cannot prevent the petitioner from selling the hot badam milk, after mixing the component and heating the same.”
After clarifying the earlier order passed by the Court, the court disposed of the said writ petition.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order, this writ appeal is filed by the appellant.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
It appears to us that the intention of the court has been made clear in the said order as the court has only directed the writ petitioner to sell Vijaya Dairy products and further held that so long as the badam powder and milk are supplied by Vijaya Dairy, the respondents cannot prevent the petitioner from selling the hot badam milk, after making the component and heating the same. The order passed by his Lordship is a clarificatory order as the earlier order passed in W.P.No.18785 of 2010 on 24-12-2010 has become final.
Therefore, we do not find that there is any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by his Lordship and on the contrary we also find no merit in this writ appeal.
Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed.
( PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, ACJ )
( VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,
J )
Dt: 14-08-2012.
TNB
M. Eswara Reddy
V. Mallikarjuna and Others
Pinaki Chandra Ghose
Vilas V. Afzulpurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
