Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13286 (AP)

THE VICE PRESIDENT (MFG.) v. KANTHETI RAMAKRISHNA VARA PRASAD AND ANOTHER

WP/4102/2005 · 2025-08-20

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010160512005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4102/2005 Between: 1. THE VICE PRESIDENT (MFG.), KUMARASWAMY RAJA NAGAR, JAGGAIAHPET TALUK KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. KANTHETI RAMAKRISHNA VARA PRASAD AND ANOTHER, C/O.A.RAJENDRA BABU, H.NO.6-3-596/60 (780) VENKATARAMANA COLONY, KHAIRTABAD, HYDERABAD. 2. THE PRESIDING OFFICER THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL, TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari after calling for the records relating to the Award in ID ICID No.181/2003 dt.19.10.2004 on the file of the Hon'ble Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court at Hyderabad and quash the same and pass such other order or orders. IA NO: 1 OF 2005(WPMP 5504 OF 2005 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Award in ID ICID No.181/2003 dt.19.10.2004 on the file of the Hon'ble Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court at Hyderabad pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M PANDURANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR 2. A RAJENDRA BABU The Court made the following: ORDER: Sri Challa Hruday Raj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri M.Panduranga Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and has become infructuous. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 21st August, 2025 RKS