Dismissed

Chief Promoter/President, Tcs Group, Nizamabad Dist v. President, Toddy Tappers Coop Society, Nizamabad and 3 Oth

Telangana HC14 Oct 2022WA/1293/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed two writ appeals (Nos. 1293 and 1525 of 2014) as infructuous. The appeals challenged an order in a 2004 writ petition regarding a license to sell toddy in the Nizamabad area for the period 2002-2007.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeals were dismissed as infructuous without any order as to costs.

What the court decided

Chief Promoter/President, Tcs Group, Nizamabad Dist… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[^32e5 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V- BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT APPEAL Nos.f 293 and 1525 of 2014

¶8

WRIT APPEAL NO: 1293 OF 2014

¶9

Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent^preferred against the order dated 12-09-2014 in W.P.No.7858 of 2003 on the file of the High Court.

¶10

Between:

¶11

TCS Group, Kamareddy ll, Kamareddy, Nizamabad, represented by its Chief Promoter/ President, Sri Muttakunta Sidda Goud, son of Bala Goud, aged about 55^years, resident of Kamareddy, Nizamabad Diskict.

¶12

AND

¶13

...AppetlanU4th Respondent

¶14

1 . Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District, Represented by its President, Sri Abbagoni Bala Goud S/o Balraj Goud.

¶15

(Writ Petitioner)

¶16

The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent-cum-Functional, Registrar, Toddy Tappers Coop. Societies, Nizamabad District At Nizamabad.

¶17

The Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Government of A.P. at Hyderabad.

¶18

The District Collector (Proh. & Excise), Nizamabad District at Nizamabad.

¶19

Prohibition and Excise Superintendent , Kamareddy, Nizamabad District.

¶20

(R-5 is implieaded as per Court Order dated 20-11-2014 in W.A.M.P.No.3218 o12014.)

¶21

...Respondents/Respondents 1 to 3

¶22

.A. NO:2 OF 2014 AMP. NO: 3{83 OF 14

¶23

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 Order dated 1210912014 made in W.P.No.7858 of 2003 pending disposal of the above Writ Appeal.

¶24

il2lt

¶25

l.A. NO: 1 OF 201 {;^fUAMP. NO: 2386 OF 2015)

¶26

Petition unclr r Section 151 CPC^praying that in the cir(;umstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the^petition, the High Courl rn;ry be^pleasedto fix an early date fc hearing the W.A.No.1293/2014 pending^(lisposal the^above writ^petition.

¶27

Counsel for the Ap rellant: SRI MIR LIKMAN ALI FOR SRl. T.C.D. SEKHAR

¶28

Counsel for the Re;pondent No.1: SRI TODUPUNURI KARTIFEYA GOUD

¶29

Counsel for the Re ;pondent Nos.2 to 5: GP FOR PROHIBITICl'l & EXCISE

¶30

WRIT APPEAL NO: 1525 OF 2014

¶31

Writ Appeal^r nder Clause 15 of the Letters Patent preferrecl against the order dtj2-O9-2014 in W^o.No.7858 of 2013 on the file of the Hioh Colrt.

¶32

Between:

¶33

The Prohibi' on & Excise Superintendent-cum-Functro til Registrar, TTCS, Nizamabad )istnct at Nizamabad.

¶34

The Commis sioner of Proh. & Excise, Government of A.P., at Hyderabad.

¶35

The District ;ollector ( Proh. &Excise), Nizamabad Districl.

¶36

...Appel I ants/Respondents

¶37

AND

¶38

Toddy Tapp^rrs Cooperative Society, Kamareddy, Kama'e ddy, Nizamabad District, rep ry its President SriAbbagoni t"," oorl:.31.:,&11!1n?J*,,,on".

¶39

TCS Group Gmareddy-ll, Kamareddy, Nizamabad, rep t)y its Chief Promoter/Pr :sident, Sri Muttakunta Sidda Goud, Sio. B;rla Goud, R/o. Kamarr ddy, Nizamabad District.

¶40

...Respon lentsiRespondents

¶41

l.A. NO: 3 OF 201 AMP. NO: 3864 OF 2014

¶42

Petition un( ?r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit filed n support of the petition, the High Court rray be pleased to suspend the oper; tion of the order dt.12-09-2014 passed by lr:a.ned Single Judge in W.P.No.7858 o 2003.

¶43

Counsel for the I opellants: SRl. K. UDAY KUMAR

¶44

AGP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE

¶45

Counsel forthe F espondents: SRI TODUPUNURI KARTIKI:"II GOUD

¶46

The Court deliver :d the following: COMMON JUDGMENT

¶47

¶48

¶49

THE [{ON'BI-E THE CHIEF TIJST I CE T]IIAL BHTJYAN AND

¶50

TH H N'BLE SRI IIISTICE .V.BI-IASKAR REDDY

¶51

WRIT A-PPEAI Nos.1293 and 1525 of 2014

¶52

COMMON JUDGMENT : (), tl, t n,r htu tr. t t.t tk,t! t tp! ut,k.ta,)

¶53

Heard Mr. Mir Lukman Ali, learned counsel for the appellant in W.A.No. 1293 of 2014 and Mr. K.Udziy Kumar, learned Assistant Grlvernment Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for the appellants in W.A.No. 1525 of 2014.

¶54

The two writ appeals a-rise out of the common order dated 72.O9.2074 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of W.P.No.4962 of 2003 and batch.

¶55

The related rwit petitions and the two writ appeals pertain to license to sell toddy in respect of Nizamabad area for the period from OL.O4.2OO2 to 3 i .O3.2007 under license dated O4.05.2002.

¶56

" ,4. That being the position, we are of the view that the two writ ' appeals have become infructurous.

¶57

\r\ 5 Acr:ordingly, Lhe writ:rppeals are dismissed as iniructuous.

¶58

¶59

Miscellane,,us applications pending, if any, sha I stand closed.

¶60

However, there s rall be no order as to costs.

¶61

SD/-K.ONESIM DEPI'TYSEGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ( J_) SECTION OFFICER

¶62

¶63

To, 1 One CC to Srr^'.C.D. Sekhar. Advocate [OPUC] 2 Two CCs to G⁾ for Prohibition & Excise, High Court for the Slate of Telangana at l- yderabad. [OUT] One CC to Sri^-odupunuri Kartikeya Goud, Advocate [OPLI(;] 4 Two CD Copie ; 5 One Spare Co ry CHR BS

I l

HIGH COUF

DATED:1411012022

COMMON.J JDGMENT

W.A.Nos.12 )3 and 1525 of 2014

¶70

DISMISSIN(; THE WRIT APPEALS AS INFRUC TUOUS WITHOUT C OSTS

¶71

\ i- " .. <br>l
// (
?.!
B I lrr]li 20?2
ti .C)
,/
,1,"
<br>-<br>pg
{v
/L rW-

Chief Promoter/President, Tcs Group, Nizamabad Dist v. President, Toddy Tappers Coop Society, Nizamabad and 3 Oth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Chief Promoter/President, Tcs Group, Nizamabad Dist v. President, Toddy Tappers Coop Society, Nizamabad and 3 Oth

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

Bhuvana Marni Vs Union of India

R. Sameer Ahmed Vs State of Telangana

Sri. P. Thirumala Rao Vs Union of India

The Proh. and Excise Superintendent-Cum-Functional Reg.,and 2 Vs Toddy Tappers Coop., Society, Niz., and Another

Mrs. Gladys Reddy, Hyderabad. Vs the State of A.P. Hyderabad and 2 Others

Union of India, S.C.R., Secbad and 2 Othrs Vs Syed Abdul Habeb ( Died ), Hyd and 2 Othrs