SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1957 Supreme(AP) 26

KUMARAYYA
In re, Atmakuri Gopalkrishnarao – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


Advocates:
D.P. Narayanarao, for Petitioners; A Venkataramana, for Govt. Pleader.

ORDER :- I am now concerned only with the question whether two or more persons can join in a single petition for a writ of mandamus to enforce their separate claims. The petitioners before me are individual owners of ten rice mills in Krishna District. Ever since 1951, each one of these ten petitioners has been taking out a separate licence in respect of his mill on payment of a fixed licence fee of Rs. 24/-. A sum of Rs. 200 collected by way of deposit for the due performance of the conditions of licence still continues to be a deposit for the same. But, when the petitioners applied separately as usual for renewal of their licences for the year 1956-57, the Collector of Krishna made a demand of a further deposit of Rs. 300 from each on the ground that the mill of every petitioner is equipped with a sheller or a sheller grinding stone. Aggrived by these orders, the petitioners have come to this Court. Through this joint petition they now call in question the legality of the orders passed on their respective petitions and request that a writ of mandamus or any order or direction in the nature of a writ be issued to the Collector, Krishna directing him to renew the licences of the pe














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top