Telangana High Court
WP/27117/2006 of Alladi Srinivas, Vs Government of A.P., rep. by its prl., Secretary, on 29 December 2006
SHRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 27117 OF 2006 Between: Alladi Srinivas & others ..... Petitioners AND Government of A.P., Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Hyderabad & others
HON'BLE SHRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICEAND
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.27117 OF2006
Between:
Alladi Srinivas & others
AND
..... Petitioners
Government of A.P.,Rep. By its Principal Secretary,Agriculture and Cooperation Department,Hyderabad & others
.....Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
:: O R D E R ::
Counsel for the petitioners : Shri M. Rama Rao Dated: 29.12.2006
Per G.S.SINGHVI, CJ
The petitioners, whose names are included in the voterslist of Rural Electric Co-operative Society Limited, Sircilla,Karimnagar, have filed this petition with the complaint that namesof about 25,000 persons, who are consumers of electricitysupplied by the society, have not been included in the voters’ listand have prayed for issue of a direction to the respondents toconduct elections only after including the names of electric usersas members in the valid voters’ list.
At the hearing of the petition, we enquired from Shri M.Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners whether or not thenames of his clients have been included in the voters’ list. Inreply, learned counsel fairly stated that his clients’ names figure inthe voters’ list. He, however, submitted that the names of 25,000other persons have not been included in the voters’ list.
In our opinion, the petitioners do not have the locus to makea grievance on behalf of others whose names are said to havebeen omitted from the voters’ list because it is neither the pleadedcase of the petitioners nor any material has been placed before theCourt that those persons are handicapped due to poverty,ignorance or any such other disability from seeking protection oftheir right by filing petition under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia or availing appropriate legal remedy.
With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition,W.P.M.P.No.34855 of 2006 filed by the petitioners for interim reliefis also dismissed.
29.12.2006ksld
G.S.SINGHVI, CJ
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J