A.P.State Coop. Societies Secretaries & Employees Union v. The Commissioner & Registrar of Coop. Societies, Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 09 Aug 2004
- Bench
- GODA RAGHURAM
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 2626. The Secretary to Govt.of A.P., Cooperation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. (Respondent No.25 is impleaded as per Court order in W.P.M.P.No.29978/2003 and Respondent No.26 as per Court order in W.P.No.20514/2003, dt.12.11.2003) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances…
Judgment
The Commissioner & Registrar of Coop. Societies, Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The District Cooperative Officer Hyderabad, Hyderabad District. 3 The District Cooperative Officer, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. 4 The District Cooperative Officer, Guntur, Guntur District, 5 The District Cooperative Officer, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 6 The District Cooperative Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 7 The District Cooperative Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District. 8 The District Cooperative Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 9 The District Cooperative Officer, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District.
10 The District Cooperative Officer, Srikakuluam, Srikakulam District. 11 The District Cooperative Officer, Adilabad, Adilabad District. 12 The District Cooperative Officer, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 13 The District Cooperative Officer, Medak, Sanga Reddy District. 14 The District Cooperative Officer, Nellore, Nellore District. 15 The District Cooperative Officer, Ongole, Prakasham District. 16 The District Cooperative Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 17 The District Cooperative Officer, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District. 18 The District Cooperative Officer, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 19 The District Cooperative Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 20 The District Cooperative Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 21 The District Cooperative Officer, Khammam, Khammam District. 22 The District Cooperative Officer, Warangal, Warangal District. 23 The District Cooperative Officer, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. 24 The District Cooperative Officer, Karimnagar, karimnagar District.
The A.P.State Coperative Bank Ltd., Troop Bazar, Hyderabad, rep.by its General Manager Sri C.Prabhakar Reddy.
The Secretary to Govt.of A.P., Cooperation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. (Respondent No.25 is impleaded as per Court order in W.P.M.P.No.29978/2003 and Respondent No.26 as per Court order in W.P.No.20514/2003, dt.12.11.2003) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not taking into account the interest receivable by the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies (P.A.C.S.,) for the purpose of assessing and computing the gross profit prescribed under Sec.116-C is illegal, unjust, contrary to law, apart from contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, with particular reference to Sec.
116-C of the 'Act' and consequentially direct the Respondents herein to take into account, the interest receivable by the Primary Agricultural Cooperative Societies (P.A.C.S.,) for the purpose of assessing and computing the gross profit under Sec. 116-C of the 'Act' and fix the emoluments on the said basis accordingly as was done in Dhulikatta P.A.C.S., by proceedings in Rc.No.8767/2001-C, dt.19/7/2003, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.R.PRABHAKAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION. The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw the writ petition. The writ petition is, on the basis of the above submission, dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. ______________ 9th August, 2004. Pan To 1) The Commissioner & Registrar of Coop. Societies, Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad 2) The District Cooperative Officer, Hyderabad, Hyd. District. 3) The District Cooperative Officer, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad.
4) The District Cooperative Officer, Guntur, Guntur District, 5) The District Cooperative Officer, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 6) The District Cooperative Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 7) The District Cooperative Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District. 8) The District Cooperative Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 9) The District Cooperative Officer, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 10) The District Cooperative Officer, Srikakuluam, Srikakulam District. 11) The District Cooperative Officer, Adilabad, Adilabad District. 12) The District Cooperative Officer, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 13) The District Cooperative Officer, Medak, Sanga Reddy District. 14) The District Cooperative Officer, Nellore, Nellore District. 15) The District Cooperative Officer, Ongole, Prakasham District. 16) The District Cooperative Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 17) The District Cooperative Officer, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District.
18) The District Cooperative Officer, Cuddapah, Cuddapah Dt. 19) The District Cooperative Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 20) The District Cooperative Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda Dt. 21) The District Cooperative Officer, Khammam, Khammam District. 22) The District Cooperative Officer, Warangal, Warangal Dt. 23) The District Cooperative Officer, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. 24) The District Cooperative Officer, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 25) Sri C.Prabhakar Reddy, General Manager, The A.P.State Coperative Bank Ltd., Troop Bazar, Hyderabad, 26) The Secretary to Govt.of A.P., Cooperation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 27) Two C.Cs to the Govt. Pleader for Cooperation, High Court builds, Hyderabad. 28) Two CD copies.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; A.P.Cooperative Societies Act, 1964.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 09 Aug 2004. The bench was GODA RAGHURAM.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.