Dismissed

Vellanki Srinivas Kumar, v. Joint Commissioner of Labour am Joint Registrar of Trade Uni

Telangana HC5 Feb 2025WP/40181/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Petition No.40181 of 2017, the petitioner sought to quash order No. B/13321/2017 directing an election and sought to contest the same. The respondent counsel submitted that the cause of action did not survive. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as infructuous without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. No costs awarded.

Vellanki Srinivas Kumar, Vs Joint Commissioner of… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^3s00 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:40181 OF 2017

¶8

Between:

¶9

v^ellanki.S.rinivas Kumar, s/o chandra Shekhar Rao Aged about 57 years Flat No 10, Block ltt, Road No. 16, Fitm Nagar, Jubti Hiils, Hyderibad _ 500 096.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 Joint commissioner of Labour am Joinl- Registrar of rrade Union, Twin cities, Anjaiah Bhavan,Chikkadapally, Hyderapad-- S0O 020

¶13

2 Returning^Officer cum Asst. Corrvnissioner of Labour-ll, Hyderabad, Anjaiah Bhavan, Chikkadapally, Hyderabad - 500 O2O

¶14

3 Telugu Cine Artists Union, Regd. No.82193 B-2-2g3lg2l1tA. Jawahar Colonv Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.34Represented by its Chairman Si V. Cninna^{- -} '' Srisailam Yadav

¶15

4 Ipty-g., t'E^{lndustry Employees Federqtion, Regd. No.A-749 phase} No.3, Flat No.326, Kamalapuri Colony, Srinagar Colon-y, Hyderabad _ ii^{-- -'} Represented by its General Secretary

¶16

5 State of Telangana represented by its Ohief Secretary, Department of Clnetmatography Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass orders directing the 1't Respondent more specifically in the nature of writ of mandamus not to interfere ln the independent election process consequently set aside the orders No. B / i 3p2 I 2017 dated 24.11.2017.

¶19

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2017 PMP. NO:532980F 20171

¶20

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the .rircumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to permit the Petitione r to amend the main prayer as follows: ,,....to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in the rndependent erection process consequent y set aside the orders No. 8r13321201 7 dated 24.11.2017 and arso permit the petitioner to contest the erection of ther office bearer of the 3rd respondent ur ion, besides declaring the proceedings bearing File No.Bl1 33212017, dated 8,12.2017 issued by the respondent and pass....,, in place of " to issue a writ of mandamus directing the responrients not to interfere in the independent .rection process consequenry set asice the orders No. B/ 133212017 dared 24 11 2017 and arso permit me to contest the erection of the office bearer of the 3rd respondent union" and pass such or<Jer or orders.

¶21

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2O17(W' PMP. NO: 498 55 0F 20 171

¶22

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the 2nd resporrdent to permit the petitioner to contest the erection of the office bearer to the 3rd respondent unton by suspending orders No. ACL_ 11lHYDl35Bl2017 dzied 24.11 2017 issued by the 2nd respondent pending disposar of the -above rivrit petition and pass such other crder or orders -may _ deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI N.VINESH RAJ

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : Gp FOR LABOUR

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : GP FoR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION Counsel for the Respondents No.3&4 :

¶26

¶27

The Court made the f,rllowing: ORDER

¶28

¶29

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.[O18L of 2OL7

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Today, when the mattpr is taken up, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Labour representing

¶33

respondent Nos.l ald 2, submitg that the cause in the writ

¶34

petition does not survive for adjudication

¶35

2 Recording the saidl submission, the Writ

¶36

Petition is dismissed as infructucius. No costs.

¶37

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶38

stand closed.

¶39

SD/- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG STANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 One CC to SRI N.VINESH^{RAJ,Advogate.} [OPUC]

¶45

2 Two CCs to GP FOR LABOUR,^High Gourt^{for the Stateof Telangana.} [OUT] Two CCs to GP FOP. GP^{FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, High Courtfor} the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶46

4 Two CD Copies.

ABSK GJP

HIGH COUR-T

DATED:05101212025

ORDER

1 F- =-=---
( o ).
2 5 AUtj 20lh .- 1r
= '/
oi. \1,: i
,r<-'

¶52

WP.No.40181 of 2017

¶53

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

bBr

Vellanki Srinivas Kumar, v. Joint Commissioner of Labour am Joint Registrar of Trade Uni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vellanki Srinivas Kumar, v. Joint Commissioner of Labour am Joint Registrar of Trade Uni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ivrcl, Sew and Prasad (J.v) Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

P. Ravi, Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Smt.Vanam Anuradha Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Suriti Krishna, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Rajasthani Jain Swethamber Moorthy Pujak Sangh Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Endowments

Thirumala Venkatesh Vs The State of Telangana