Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25279 (AP)

M.N.V. Lakshman v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/16874/2018 · 2025-03-26

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16874 OF 2018 Between: M.N.V. Lakshman, S/o. Veerraju, Age 32 years, Occ: Lab Technician in ASRAM Hospital, R/o. D.No.25-5-12, Raghava Saw Mill, Narasimharaopet, Eluru-534006. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary to the Labour Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The Authority under Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Joint Commissioner of Labour Zone-ll Eluru. 3. The ASRAM Educational Society, Represented by its Secretary, Malkapuram, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari District. 4. The Chief Administrative Officer, ASRAM Hospital, Malkapuram, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the Order passed in M.W.M.P.Case.No.7 of 2017, dated 27-2-2018, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act. Consequently, direct the respondent no.2 to entertain the claim petition of r' the petitioner in regarding with the payment of minimum wages a sum of ’ R&.8 44,500/- and adjudicate the same in accordance with Law. ; a IA NO:1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to entertain the claim petition filed by the petitioner in regarding with the payment of minimum wages a of Rs.8,44,500/- and adjudicate the same in accordance with Law. sum Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : GP FOR LABOUR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 : SRI G.V. GANESH The Court made the following: ORDER tr APHC010357052018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] r WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 16874/2018 Between: M.N.V. Lakshman ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KVENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR LABOUR (AP) 2.G VS GANESH ...RESPONDENT(S) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Order passed in MWMP Case No.7 of 2017 dated 27.02.2018 is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act. Consequently, direct the respondent No.2 to entertain the claim petition of the petitioner in regarding with the payment of mi9nimum Rs.8,44,500/- and adjudicate the same in accordance with law. 2. The earlier Docket Proceedings would show that none represented for was directed to be listed today under the caption wages a sum of the Petitioner and the matter For Dismissal". 2 For dismissal", none listed under the caption 3. Despite the matter being represented for the Petitioner today. 4. Learned counsel for respondents 5 in that view, the Writ Petition is 3 and 4 is in attendance, is dismissed for non-prosecution . No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shalUtand dosed- //TRUE COPY// Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar SECTION OFFICER To, OneCCto Sri K. Venumadhav, Advocate [OPUC] 2 TWO CCS to GP for Labour, High court of Andhra Pradesh. lOUTl 3. one CC to Sri G.V.S. Ganesh, Advocate (OPUC) 4. Three C.D. Copies. 1 Cnr HIGH COURT DATED:26/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.16874of 2018 09 APR 21® ^ . Current Sectitm ^ \£.OgSPATC*t^ DISMISSING THE W.P. FOR NON- PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS