Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20868 (AP)

Sai Rayalaseema Paper Mills Ltd. v. The Controlling Authority under payment of Gratuity Act

WP/11618/2013 · 2026-02-04

Harinath N

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010246152013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 11618/2013 Between: 1. SAI RAYALASEEMA PAPER MILLS LTD.,, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (SEC. & CORPORATE AFFAIRS) MR.S.E.RAO, PLOT NO.5, H.NO.8-2-603/M/5, MITHILA NAGAR, ROAD NO.10, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD- 500 034 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR, KURNOOL. 2. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR/APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KURNOOL. 3. L SESHAGIRI RAO S/O LATE PADMAJI RAO, EX-EMPLOYEE, SAI RAYALASEEMA PAPER MILLS LTD., H.NO.35/69, KUMMARI STREET, KURNOOL ...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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari to call for records, examine the same and quash the order dated 29.08.2010 passed in the case of PG NO.8 of 2010 by Respondent No.1 as confirmed by Respondent No.2 by way of rejection order dated07.03.2013 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 21 of the 2 Constitution of India besides violative of order 9 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or to direct the Respondent No.1 to re-calculate the actual gratuity payable to the Respondent No.3 as per law and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble High Court deems fit and proper in the circumstance of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 14390 OF 2013 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 the execution of the order dated 29.08.2010 in the case of PG No.8/2010 passed by the Respondent No.1 pending the disposal of the main writ petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 grant Leave filing of the Counter Affidavit in WP.No. 11618 of 2013 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T KUMAR BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR 2. M SRIKANTH 3. G SRAVAN KUMAR The Court made the following: 3 Order:- Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive any further. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 05.02.2026 PNS