Pedavegi Venkata Prasad v. the Commissioner for Co-Operation
Case brief
What is this about?
The Writ Petition was closed by the High Court because the respondents submitted that no further orders were necessary as the petitioners were continuing in service pursuant to an interim suspension order passed earlier.
What did the court decide?
No further orders in the writ petition; miscellaneous petitions closed.
What the court decided
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
W.P.No.16552 OF 2003
ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
“to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents directing removal of the petitioners from service as Attender and Clerk as per orders dated 26.7.2003 and the consequential resolutions passed by the 5th respondent Society dated 25.7.2003 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, besides declaring the Section 116-C of the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act, is prospective and direct the respondents to continue the petitioners in service in the 5th respondent society with all consequential benefits and grant such other relief as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
While admitting the writ petition on 26-09-2003, this Court
granted interim suspension.
Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents
submits that in pursuance of the said interim order, the petitioners are continuing in service and hence, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the action of respondents to remove petitioners from service as Attender and Clerk is illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21.
Whether Section 116-C of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act should be declared prospective.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioners
- respondent
Respondents
Coram
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/16552/2003
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court