Dismissed

Fishermen Co-operative Society v. The Deputy, Director of Fisheries

Telangana HC20 Mar 2023WP/2349/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An order of the High Court for the State of Telangana dismissing a writ petition and a miscellaneous application as infructuous. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause of action did not survive adjudication, leading to the dismissal of both petitions. Pending miscellaneous applications were also closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; miscellaneous applications closed; order without costs.

Fishermen Co-operative Society Vs The Deputy… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

tI i

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRt JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 2349 OF 2013

¶8

Between:

¶9

Irpfgrm_en^{Co-operative59.l"ty,.Lingarajupalli,} Voligonda Mandat, Natqonda District Rep..bv its^president, peidagoii 3g;g, s7o.'tr,trttllii-i, iriijl,'"slo'r[8Ji'52 years, RJo. Lingaraju palti, Voligonda Mandal, llialgonO j Oistriit.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . The Deputy, Director of Fisheries, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶13

2, The Fishedes Oevelopment Officer, Bhongir, Nalgonda District.

¶14

The Deputy Superintendent of police, Bhongir, Nalgonda District

¶15

4- The lnspector of^police, Ramannapeta, Nalgonda District.

¶16

The Station House Officer, Voligonda, Nalgonda District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus decraring action of the respondents in not providing porice aid to FCs Lingaralu Parri at the time of harvesting the fish in papireni cheruvu of Lingara;u Palli village, Vorigonda Mandar, Nargonda District for the year 2o1z-13 as bad, arbitrary and contrary to all cannons of law and also offends Art. 14, 19 & 21 of Constitution of lndia

¶19

LA. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 2857 OF 2013)

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High Court maybe pleasedmay} issue direction to the respondents^{4 & 5 to provide police aid to FCS LingarajuPall} at the time of harvesting^{the fish in Papirenicheruvu of LingarajuPalli village,} Voligonda Mandal, Nalgonda^District.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SMT. M. VIDYAVATHI}

¶22

Counsel forthe^{Respondent Nos' 1 &2:GP FORFISHERIES}

¶23

Counsel forthe Respondent^{Nos.3 to 5: GP FOR HOME}

¶24

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶25

¶26

HON'BLE SRTJUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.2349 of 2Ol3

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

When the matter is taken up for consideration,

¶29

learned counsel for the petitioner, fairly submits that the

¶30

cause in the writ petition does not suryive for a_djudication.

¶31

2 In view of the above submission, this writ petition is

¶32

dismissed as in lructuous.

¶33

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,

¶34

pending in rhis writ peririon shall stand closed.

¶35

SD/.G.SIRE E HA ASS]STANT REGIS

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION FICER

To,

One CC to^{SRI M. VIDYAVATHI' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶40

Two CCs^{to GP for Fisheries,High court for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶41

3.TwoCCstoGPforHome,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶42

Two CD CoPies

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010312023

1 y.E S 14 16
(o o-..
:)
t,, [ 3 li[Y ?ffI]
<br>\ . -,i,
'-j.
ORDER

¶48

WP.No.2349^{of 2013}

¶49

DISMISSING^{THE WRIT PETITION} AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT^COSTS

Fishermen Co-operative Society v. The Deputy, Director of Fisheries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fishermen Co-operative Society v. The Deputy, Director of Fisheries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tirupathi Jampanna, Kothagudem Dist., and 5 Otrs. Vs the State of Ts.,Revenue,Hyderabad, and 3 Otrs.

A.Mahesh Vs Smt. Dhanalakshmi and 2 Others

M/s.Ayyappa Stone Crushers Vs State of Telangana and 4 others

Anjuman-E-Alavi Shia Imamia Ithna Ashari Akhbari Vs State of Ap,Scy,Minorities,Hyd,and 3

Fishermen Coop.Society Ltd.,Rep.by President, R.R.Dist. Vs the State of a.P.,Rep.by Commissioner,Fisheries,Hyd.,and 2 Otr

Mudiraj Matsya Paresrameka Sangam, Vs The State of Telangana