IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 735 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 25/04/2008 in WP NO : 3492 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 G.Cecil Paul S/o. G.Jesuratnam H.No.3-786, Greemspet, Vellore Road, Chittoor District. 2 P.Muni Raja S/o. P.Krishnaiah R/o. H.No. 3-99, Kondametta Street, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District. ..... APPELLANT(S) AND 1 The Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, Animal Husbandary, Dairy Development & Fisheries Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The A.P.Dairy Development Coop. Federation Rep. by its Managing Director, Lalapet, Hyderabad. 3 The Chittoor District Cooperative Milk Produces Union Ltd., Milk Products Factory, Chittoor, Rep. by its General Manager/ Liquidator. 4 The Principal Secretary to the Govt., Public Enterprises (1) Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5 The District Collector, Chittoor District. 6 K.Babu Saheb S/o. Y.Peeru Saheb R/o. H.no. 83, Bairgaipattada, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 7 R.Vijaya Lakshmi W/o. Danujaya Gupta Chittoor District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., Chittoor. 8 P. Babaiah S/o. Late P.G.Chinna Peeraiah Chittoor District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd., Chittoor. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR FISHERIES The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (: Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) Against the common order dated 25-4-2008 passed in W.P.No. 874 of 2003, this appeal has been filed. It is pertinent to note that an appeal filed against the common order i n W.P.No. 874 of 2003 had been dismissed by this Court by an order dated 3-7-2008 and, therefore, this appeal also deserves to be dismissed and accordingly we dismiss the appeal. Learned Advocate Sri G.Vidyasagar, appearing for the appellants, however submitted that the present appellants were appointed by respondent No.2-Federation. If it is so, it will be open to the appellants to take appropriate further action, if they are aggrieved by any other order passed by the 2nd respondent-Federation. Subject to the above, the appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs. _______________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 21st July, 2008. ___________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J GRR