Kadapa Town, Kadapa District v. Kdadpa Town & District
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to the
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- A.P.Co-Operative Societies Act, 1964 ss. 76, 77
- A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 s. 76(1)
Judgment
Co-Operative Blds Society, R/o. D.No.7/556, Jayanagar Colony, Cuddapah Town & District. 3 Santhakala Munaiah, S/o. Pedda Veeraiah, Cuddapah, R/o. Cuddpah. 4 Smt. Hemalatha Devi, W/o. Hemaraj Jain, R/o. Door No. 18/505, B.K.M. Street, Kadapa Town, Kadapa District. 5 S. Prakash Chand Jain, S/o. Hemraj, R/o. Door No. 18/505, B.K.M. Street, Kadapa Town, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Govt of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, Department of Agriculture & Co-Operation, Secretariat, Hyd. 2 The Spl. Chief Secretary to Govt, Department of Housing (CH), Secretariat, Hyd. 3 M. Venkata Ramana, S/o. Venkatappa, R/o. 7/536-6, Opp. Venkateshwara Remple, Jayanagar Colony, Kdadpa Town & District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order in Memo No.327/Ch1/2004-1, dt.
23.2.2004 passed by the 2nd respondent staying the operation of Award in Arbitration case C.L.No.2/2002-03 Dt. 28.1.2004 passed by the Divisional Co-Operative Officer, Cuddapah, as the same is passed illegally, arbitrarily, contrary to principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction and contrary to specific provisions contained in Ss.76&77 of A.P.Co-Operative Societies Act, 1964 and consequently set aside the said order in Memo No.327/Ch1/2004-1, Dt. 23.2.2004 passed by the 2nd respondent and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENKATESH GUPTA Counsel for Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for Respondent No.3: -- The Court at the stage of admission made the following Order: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the order passed by the second respondent-Special Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Housing (CH), Secretariat, Hyderabad, dated 23-02-2004, as illegal and arbitrary.
As can be seen from the material on record, the Divisional Co-operative Officer, Kadapa passed an Award dated 28-01-2004 holding that the allotment and sale of land to the third respondent herein is illegal. Aggrieved by the same, the third respondent herein preferred an Appeal under Section 76(1) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’) and the same is pending. The writ petitioners are the respondents 1 to 5 in the said Appeal. Now, this writ petition is filed alleging that the third respondent has simultaneously preferred a Revision before the 1st respondent – Government of Andhra Pradesh in which by order dated 23-02-2004 the operation of the Award dated 28-01-2004 has been stayed. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that since the Award dated 28-01-2004 is appealable under Section 76 of the Act, the revision is not maintainable and therefore the impugned order of stay cannot be sustained and liable to be set aside.
Operative part
It is always open to the petitioners to contest the Revision Petition before the 2nd respondent by urging all the grounds as available under law including the objection as to the maintainability of the revision. The petitioner cannot be permitted to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, without raising such objection before the authority before whom the proceedings are pending. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to the petitioners to make an appropriate application before the second respondent in the revision said to have been pending. If such an application is filed, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
No costs. ______________ 07-10-2004 To 1 The Secretary ,Govt of A.P., Department of Agriculture & Co-Operation, Secretariat, Hyd. 2 The Spl. Chief Secretary to Govt, Department of Housing (CH), Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 Two C.Cs. to the Government Pleader for Co-operation, High Court Buildings, A.P., Hyderabad, (OUT). 4 Two C.D. Copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; A.P.Co-Operative Societies Act, 1964 — ss. 76, 77; A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 — s. 76(1).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 07 Oct 2004. The bench was G ROHINI.
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.