M/s Sai Krupa Fruit Company, v. The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary,
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: T.MADHAVI DEVI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-11-26. M/s Sai Krupa Fruit Company, v. The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary,. Read...
Judgment text
32re [ ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE TWENrySIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER IWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO: 7667 OF 2017 Between l M/s Sai Krupa Fruit Company, Shop No. E-56, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Rep by its Managing partner, Sri. lvl-Santhosh Kumar, S/o M. Narsimloo, Aged about 40 years, Rl/o House No,l1-1 -4112, Bapu Nagar, Road No. S, Saroor Nagar' Hyderabad' Telangana ... pETrroNER AND 1. The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secrelary, Agricultural and Cooperation (l\,4arketing) Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad, Telangana. 2. Agricultural L4arket Committee, Gaddiannaram, rep by its Chairman, Fruit Market, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad, TS. 3. The Selection Grade Secretary, Agricultural Market Committee, Gaddiannaram' Hyderabad TS ... RES'.
NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia 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, i) declaring the action of the respondents 2 aM 3 in not allowing and restricting the petitioner firm to carry on its commission agent business in fruits at Shop No. E-56, Fruit market, Gaddiannaram, aM in obstructing the ingress of the growers who come to sell their produce through the petitioner firm and also in not accepting the market fee being paid by the petitioner firm,inspite of holding of valid licence under Section 7(1) of the Markets Act 1966 by the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, against the provisions of the Markets Act and Rules and unconstitutiona I l. A. NO: 1 oF 2017(W PMP .
NO:9454 oF 20171 I I 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 direct the respondents 2 and 3 to arow the petitioner firm to car4/ on business as . Commission agent in Shop No. E_S6, Fruit market, Gaddiannarant, by allowing its growers inside the market dury accepting the remittances of rnarket fee etc. , pending disposal of the above writ petition counsel for the petitioner: p. sRr GANGATAH NA,DU sENroR couNSEL REp Ms. G. BHANU pRtyA Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: Gp FOR AGRTCULTURE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2&3: Ms. NEERAJA REDDy (sc FOR TG AGRL M C) The Court made the following: ORDER 'i ; t I ,| I . l THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION No. 7667 0F 2017 ORDER: The Writ petition is frled seeking the following reliefl "... to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus i.
declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not allowing and restricting th€ petitioner firm lo carry on its commission agent bushess in fruits at Shop No. E-56, Fruit market, Gaddiannaram and in obstructing the ingress of the growers who come to sell their pmduce through the petitioner firm and also in not accepting the market fee being paid by the petitioner firm in spite of holding of valid licence under Section 7( I ) of the Markets Act 1966 by the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, against the provisions of the Markets Act and Rulei and unconstitutional; iil and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may de. em fit and proper" 2. Sri P. Gangaiah Naidu, leamed Senior Counsel representing leamed counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the interim order dated 17. 04. 2017 and further since the Agricultural Market Committee of Gaddiannaram has already been demolished, no further orders are necessary to be passed in this Writ Petition. 3.
In view of the above submisslons, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, il any, shall also stand dismissed. SD/. L. LAKS HMI ASSI TANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER "'1, state or re,ansana Bt'JirAgli:61:i3;"'3lrhe ? ffi B3Ji"%r";osIABH at Hvderabad [OUT] FOR TG AGRL M C) IOPUCI G NEERAJA REDDY(SC 3. One'CC to Ms 4 Two CD CoPies BNT +e GJP i HIGH COURT I l DATED:2611112024 S1a7 1HE C 6 o ora + 2 I . iAl,l 2025 z a ORDER t I WP. No. 7667 of o $ 2017 CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.