P. JAYARAMIREDDY, v. THE LABOUR COURT, GUNTUR & 2 OTHERS,
WP/18333/2004 · 2025-09-21
Ravi Cheemalapati
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17611 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17611 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010240572004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 18333/2004 Between:
1. P. JAYARAMIREDDY,, S/O. NAGIREDDY, DRIVER, R/O.
NARSARAOPET, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE LABOUR COURT GUNTUR 2 OTHERS, REP. BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICER.
2. THE ENGINEERINCHIEF, MAJOR IRRIGATION, ERRAMANZIL, HYDERABAD.
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION CIRCLE, ONGOLE.
...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 call for the records from the 1st respondent and issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and quash the Award passed by the 1st Respondent in I.D.No.240/96, dt.20-5-2003, published on 17-1-2004 in dismissing the dispute as illegal, unjust, contrary to law and perverse; and set-aside the Award passed by the 1st respondent in I.D.No.240/96, dt. 20-5-2003, published on 17-1-2004 by granting all consequential benefits
2
IA NO: 1 OF 2004(WPMP 24086 OF 2004 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 fix an early date of hearing of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A K JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR LABOUR
2. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV
3
The Court made the following order:
When the matter is taken up for consideration today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. On earlier occasion also i.e., on 12.07.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting his case. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications are closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 22.09.2025 MP
4
146 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO:18333 of 2004 Date: 22.09.2025
MP