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

The Nidamanuru Primary – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent


COMMON JUDGMENT

(per C. Praveen Kumar, J)

1. As both these appeals are interconnected, they are disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard Sri R.N.Hemendranath Reddy, counsel for the appellant in both the appeals; Government Pleader for Cooperation for Respondents 1 to 3 in W.A.No.1530 of 2018 and Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in W.A.No.1762 of 2018; and Sri Ganta Prasad, counsel for respondent No.4 in W.A.No.1530 of 2018 and respondent No.1 in W.A.No.1762 of 2018 and perused the record. 3. The appellant herein filed the Writ Petition No.15001 of 2017 seeking issuance of writ of certiorari, calling for records in O.A.No.44 of 2016 on the file of the A.P. Co-operative Tribunal at Vijayawada and to set aside the order, dated 30.03.2017, passed in the said O.A.

th

4. Writ Petition No.11838 of 2018 was filed by the 4 respondent in st W.A. No.1530 of 2018 (1 respondent in W.A.No.1762 of 2018) seeking issuance of writ of certiorari, calling for records relating to order, dated 21.03.2018, passed in M.P.No.96 of 2017 in O.A.No.44 of 2016 on the file of the A.P. Cooperative Tribunal at Vijayawada and quash the same.

5. In order to decide the issue raised, it would be appropriate to refer to few facts w

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