Bharat Cricket Club v. The Secretary
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY Review I.A.No.3 of 2022 in WRIT APPEAL No.558 of 2022 ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan) Heard Mr. V.Raghunath, learned counsel for the review petitioner.
2.
This review application has been filed for review of order dated 30.08.2022 passed by this Court dismissing both the related writ appeal and the interlocutory application with costs.
3.
Relevant portion of the order dated 30.08.2022 reads as under:
"2.
This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 06.07.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.28339 of 2022 filed by the appellants as the writ petitioners.
3.
Appellants as the writ petitioners have filed the related writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus against the inaction of respondents No.1 and 2 in not complying, furnishing mandatory requirements, details,
copies, documents as sought for in the notice dated 04.05.2021 regarding international cricketers of the State, members of general body of respondent No.4, consequent amendments of Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) etc., being violative of Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 1921, Rules and Regulations of Hyderabad Cricket Association and the judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in Subramanian Swamy v. Board of Control for Cricket in India ((2015) 3 SCC
251) and Board of Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association of Bihar ((2016) 8 SCC 535).
4.
When the writ petition was listed before the learned Single Judge on 06.07.2022, the following order came to be passed:
"Notice before admission.
Personal notice permitted.
List on 27.07.2022."
5.
Thus, learned Single Judge had issued notice and permitted the appellants to take out personal notice upon the respondents, listing the writ petition for further consideration on 27.07.2022. On a query by the Court, it is submitted that respondents were represented on 27.07.2022 by learned counsel, who sought for time to file counter-affidavit.
6.
When notice has been issued and appellants were granted permission to take out personal notice, we fail to understand as to how they can be aggrieved by such an order, more so, there being no interim prayer in the writ petition. As a matter of fact, considering the main relief sought for, there cannot be any interim prayer in the writ petition.
7.
The writ appeal so filed is a frivolous one and therefore, deserves dismissal at the threshold. 8.
Consequently, we dismiss I.A.No.1 of 2022, which has been filed for condonation of delay of fourteen days in filing the related writ appeal, as well as the writ appeal with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the appellants to the Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee within thirty days."
4.
On a query by the Court as to what is the status of W.P.No.28339 of 2022, learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that following the order passed by the Supreme Court dated 22.08.2022 in SLP (Civil) No.6779 of 2021 constituting a supervisory committee to look into the grievance of various stakeholders, the said writ petition was withdrawn.
5.
If that be the position, nothing survives in the review application, as the review petitioner can raise his grievance before the aforesaid committee.
6.
After hearing learned counsel for the review petitioner and on due consideration, we are of the view that costs
imposed on the review petitioner may not be necessary in view of the disposal of the review application. 7.
Consequently, the direction to the review petitioner to pay costs to the Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee as directed in the order dated 30.08.2022 is hereby set aside. Order dated 30.08.2022 stands modified accordingly.
8.
Review application is accordingly disposed of. ______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 28.11.2022 vs