V.Mallikarjuna Rao, v. Telegraph Traffic Employees Co-Operative Credit Society,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD Writ Petition Nos.19234, 19242, 19243 & 19244 of 2011 Date:31.8.2016 Writ Petition No.19234 of 2011 Between:

V.Mallikarjuna Rao, S/o V.V.Ramanarao ..... Petitioner And:

Telegraph Traffic Employees Co-Operative Credit Society, Hyderabad and six others.

....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. K.Mamata Choudary Counsel for respondent No.1: Mr. K.Veerabhadra Rao Counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 7: Mr. B.Devanand The Court made the following:

CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.Nos.19234, 19242, 19243 & 19244 of 2011 Dt:31.8.2016 COMMON ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) These Writ Petitions are filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1 in giving effect to the orders of respondent No.2-District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hyderabad and in not paying amounts to the petitioners as per the orders, dated 31.01.2011, 11.02.2011, 25.01.2011 and 03.01.2011 in C.C.Nos.72, 337, 77 and 377 of 2010, respectively, of respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. A perusal of the record shows that a Writ Petition, which is similar to the present batch of Writ Petitions, filed by one M.Gangadhara Rao and others was allowed by a learned single Judge.

However, the order in the said Writ Petition was set aside by a Division Bench of this Court by its judgment, dated 21.11.2014, in Writ Appeal No.1431 of 2014. While allowing the said Writ Appeal, the Division Bench held that when the orders passed by respondent No.2 have reached finality, the writ petitioners are entitled to invoke the effective alternative remedy of seeking enforcement of the said orders and a writ Court cannot entertain the Writ Petitions of that nature. At the hearing, it is not disputed that the issues raised in the present batch of Writ Petitions are identical to that raised in Writ Appeal No.1431 of 2014.

CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.Nos.19234, 19242, 19243 & 19244 of 2011 Dt:31.8.2016 Petitions are dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioners to approach respondent No.2 seeking enforcement of the orders passed by it.

As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petitions, interim orders granted in the respective Writ Petitions are vacated and all the pending Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed as infructuous.

____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY ______________________ JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD 31st August 2016 DR