IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.14795 of 2009 Between: Arrack Bottling Unit Contract Labour Union, (Regd.No.E-901) Wyra, Khammam District, rep.by its Vice-President Elaprolu Saidulu ..... Petitioner AND 1.A.P.Beverages Corporation Ltd., N.S.P.Complex, Wyra, Khammam District, Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director and 3 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s.G.Vidya Sagar Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Mr.G.Ravi Mohan Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 & 4: None appeared The Court made the following: Order: At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are wholly incompetent to conduct tests for empanelment of Hamalies at IML Depot, Wyra, Khammam, and to set aside notification issued by respondent No.3, vide proceedings in Rc.No.A1/1249/2008, dated 17-07-2009. A perusal of the impugned notification shows that respondent No.3 has issued the same inviting applications, for holding tests on 24-07-2009, for selection of hamalies for working in respondent No.4- depot. The petitioner, which is the labour union, pleaded that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have neither power nor authority to hold such tests. Indisputably, respondent No.4- depot works under the control and supervision of respondent No.1- Corporation. If respondent Nos.1 and 4 feel that additional manpower for working as hamalis is required, they are entitled to take appropriate steps for selection and employment thereof. As rightly pleaded by the petitioner, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have no authority or jurisdiction to interfere with the affairs of respondent No.4- depot in the matter of selection and employment of hamalis. On this short ground, the impugned notice is quashed. This order, however, does not prevent respondent Nos.1 and 4 from initiating a fresh process, for engagement of hamalis in respondent No.4- depot, in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 14th June, 2011 lur