Bharat Cricket Club vs The Secretary
2022 Latest Caselaw 4363 Tel

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                       AND
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
                   I.A.No.1 of 2022 in/& W.A.No. 558 of 2022
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)

       Heard Mr. Mir Masood Khan, learned counsel for the

appellants.


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 ::2::

judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in Subramanian

Swamy v. Board of Control for Cricket in India1 and Board of

Control for Cricket v. Cricket Association of Bihar2.

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

2015(3) SCC 251

2016(8) SCC 535 ::3::

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.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand

closed.

__________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

_______________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J Date: 30.08.2022 LUR ::4::