Katam Kasi Raju vs State of Andhra Praedsh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(AP) 1544

GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
Katam Kasi Raju – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Praedsh – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : B.P. RAJU
For the Respondents: GP FOR ANIMAL HUSBANDARY

Table of Content
1. notice for no confidence motion must comply with statutory requirements. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. irregularities in notice issuance invalidates the meeting. (Para 5 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. disqualification under act should not impact the current notice. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. writ petition allowed; impugned notice quashed. (Para 12 , 13)

ORDER :

Heard Sri B.P. Raju, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners and Sri M.V. Narasimham, Assistant Government Pleader for Fisheries and Animal Husbandry for the Respondents.

2. Prayer made in the Writ Petition is as under:

“….. to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing no confidence Notice vide Rc.No.18/2022 dated 6.4.2022 there is a gap of no less than 15 clear days between date of dispatch of notice on 7.4.2022 and date of meeting on 20.4.2022 (both dates excluded) as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and clear violation of section 34(a) r/w rule 24-Aof A.P. Co-operative societies Act, 1964 and consequently to Quash the same and pass such ….”

3. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has submitted that he was unanimous