✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court

Rep. by its Managing Director, Sri Y. Raghavaiah v. Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to

Provisions considered

Judgment

M/s. Yella Constructions Limited, A Public Ltd. Company registered under Companies Act, 49-28-11, 2nd Floor, Madhuranagar, Visakhapatnam -530 016. Rep. by its Managing Director, Sri Y. Raghavaiah. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy. Chief Signal & Telecom, Engineer, Constructions, East Coast Railway, Dondaparthi, Visakhapatnam-530 016. 2 The Chief Signal & Telecom. Engineer, Projects, East Coast Railway, Rail Vihar, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar - 751 023. 3 The FA & CAO, Construction, East Coast Railway, Rail Vihar, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar -751 023. 4 The Chief Administrative Officer, Construction, East Coast Railway, Rail Vihar, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar - 751 023. 5 The General Manager, East Coast Railway, Rail Vihar, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar -751 023. 6 The Registrar of Companies, Kendriyasadan, 2nd Floor, Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad, .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not substituting the Company's name i.e, Yella Constructions Limited in place of the old Name i.e, Annapurna Rail S & T Con Limited in pursuance to fresh certification of incorporation dt. 10-2-2004 issued by the 6th respondent consequent on the change of name of under section 21 & 23 of the Companies Act 1956 is illegal, arbitrary being violative of the Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution of India and section 21 & 23 of the Companies Act and consequently direct the respondents to substitute its new the Agreement No. S & T/CON/VSKP/RRI/VZM/AGT/4 Dt. 6-8-2003 and all other subsequent Contract Agreements entered under the control of the respondents. i.e, Yella Constructions Ltd Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.S.SHIVAJI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: MR.G.S.SANGHI (SC FOR RAILWAYS) Counsel for the Respondent No.6: K.Narahari (SC FOR REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES) The Court, at the stage of admission, made the following : ORDER: The only grievance of the petitioner is that though it made a representation as long back as on 02.08.2004 requesting the respondents to substitute its name i.e., “Yella Constructions Limited” in the place of the “Annapurna Rail S & T Con Limited”, on the basis of a fresh Certificate of Incorporation dated 10.02.2004 issued by the sixth respondent-Registrar of Companies, Kendriyasadan, Hyderabad, consequent on the change of its name under Sections 21 and 23 of the Companies Act, 1956, respondents failed to consider the same and no action has been taken so far. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.G.S.Sanghi learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents and keeping in view the fact that the representation made by the petitioner is still pending before the respondents, without expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 02.08.2004 and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. __________

13.04.2005 To 1 The Deputy. Chief Signal & Telecom, Engineer, Constructions, East Coast Railway, Dondaparthi, Visakhapatnam-530 016. 2 The Chief Signal & Telecom. Engineer, Projects, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar -751 023. 3 The FA & CAO, Construction, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar -751 023. 4 The Chief Administrative Officer, Construction, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar -751 023. 5 The General Manager, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar -751 023. 6 The Registrar of Companies, Kendriyasadan, 2nd Floor, Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad, 7 2 CD copies 8 1 CC to MR.GOURI SHANKAR SANGHI 9 1 CC to MR.SHIVAJI 10 1 CC to MR.NARAHARI.

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Companies Act, 2013 — ss. 21, 23; Constitution of India — arts. 19(1)(g), 226.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments