Khader Mohiddin Vs Central Bank of India and Another

Andhra Pradesh High Court 2 Nov 1998 Writ Appeal No. 1770 of 1998 (1998) 11 AP CK 0010
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Writ Appeal No. 1770 of 1998

Hon'ble Bench

Umesh Chandra Banerjee, C.J; P. Ramakrishnam Raju, J

Advocates

M. Pandu Ranga Rao, for the Appellant; C.V. Rajeeva Reddy, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred
  • Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226

Judgement Text

Translate:

Umesh Chandra Banerjee, C.J.@mdashThis appeal is directed against an order of dismissal of the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has an alternative remedy in the matter by way of an Industrial Dispute.

2. At the first blush, upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of the parties, we did consider the matter at some length. But by reason of the Bench decision of this Court in State Bank of India and others Vs. M. Rajaiah and others, . we record our inability to lend concurrence to the submissions made by Sri M. Panduranga Rao, learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal. Reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dr Bal Krishna Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. and Others, . in our view, however, is misplaced and in any event the Supreme Court decision has no manner of application and the same is clearly distinguishable on facts. Be it noted that this Court in paragraph 32 of the judgment in State Bank''s case supra observed that the matter does not fall within the sphere of judicial review ability and having considered all the decisions in the matter, the Bench held that the writ is not maintainable and the respondents-petitioners have to seek relief for their grievances in the appropriate forum under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and not by invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. In our view, the law has been settled so far as this Court is concerned by the judgment as above. As such, this appeal fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.

From The Blog
Apple Challenges Global Turnover-Based Penalties in Delhi High Court Under Competition Act
Nov
28
2025

Court News

Apple Challenges Global Turnover-Based Penalties in Delhi High Court Under Competition Act
Read More
Calcutta High Court: Written Statements Beyond 120 Days Not Allowed; Postal Service at Registered Office Valid Under CPC
Nov
28
2025

Court News

Calcutta High Court: Written Statements Beyond 120 Days Not Allowed; Postal Service at Registered Office Valid Under CPC
Read More