K. Narasimha Reddy v. General
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 21 Sep 2004
- Bench
- V ESWARAIAH
Outcome
Dismissed
2003 and batch, the writ petition is dismissed in terms of the same
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
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 keeping the petitioner under suspension by virtue of the proceedings dated 6-9-2003 of the 4th respondent is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, capricious, without power of authority and violative on justice and the grounds of principles of natural consequentially set aside the same as the Authorities do not have any power or jurisdiction to keep me under suspension Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.R.PRABHAKAR Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for the Respondents 3 & 4: Mr.P.M.Gopal Rao The Court made the following order:
ORDER:
Operative part
Petitioner, who is the Secretary of the third respondent-Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (for short PACS), questions the order of the fourth respondent society dated 06.09.2003 in suspending him from services pending enquiry. In the judgment delivered by this Court in WP.No.3171 of 2003 and batch dated 30.08.2004, I have taken a view that the employees of the PACS have effective alternative remedies under the Special Bye- Laws, Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and the rules made thereunder and also under the Shops and Establishments Act, 1988, to question such orders of the society. For the reasons stated in the aforesaid judgment in WP.No.3171 of 2003 and batch, the writ petition is dismissed in terms of the same. No costs. September 21, 2004 Dsk/Glv To ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J 1 The District Cooperative Officer, Chittoor Chittoor District 2 The Chittoor District Coop. Central Bank, Chittoor, rep. by its General Manager. 3 The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Madanapalle, Chittoor District 4 The Person-in-charge, Udayamanikyam PACS/ Manager, DCCB, Chinnagottigallu Branch Manager Mandal & Post, Chittoor District. 5 Two CCs to GP For Cooperation, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 6 Two CD copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: 2003 and batch, the writ petition is dismissed in terms of the same
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Shops and Establishments Act, 1988.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 21 Sep 2004. The bench was V ESWARAIAH.
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.