IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 19901 of 2008 Between: P. Koteswara Rao S/o. P. John R/o. 12-4-103/A, Pragatinagar, Moosapet, Hyderabad 500018. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, R.R. District, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 2 Joint Registrar / District Co-operative Officer, R.R. District, Hyderabad. 3 Divisional Co-operative Officer, Hyderabad East Division, R.R. District, Hyderabad. 4 Person-in-Charge, The Survey of India Staff Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.,Uppal, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction and more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the ceased Managing Committee of The Survey of India Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Uppal, Hyderabad, in enrolling new members contrary to the directions in proceedings Rc.No.16438/2000/Housing (1) dated 07.06.2000 as void; and pass such other or further orders deemed just and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner claims to be a member of the Survey of India Staﬀ Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Uppal, Hyderabad, the fourth respondent herein. The society is under the administration of a person-in-charge. Some employees of the Survey of India were added as members of the society in the recent past. The petitioner states that the admission of members is contrary to Rule 18 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short ‘the Rules), and the instructions issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies from time to time, including those dated 07.06.2000. He seeks a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the former managing committee of the society in admitting members, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the instructions issued in proceedings, dated 07.06.2000. Respondents 5 to 13 ﬁled a counter-aﬃdavit opposing the plea of the petitioner. It is stated that the managing committee of the society admitted the members, strictly in accordance with Rule 18 of the Rules and the existing instructions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation and the learned counsel for respondents 5 to 13. The controversy is about enrolling certain persons as members of the society. The petitioner submits that fairly large number of persons were admitted as members contrary to the relevant provisions of law. The A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’) and the Rules made thereunder prescribe the procedure to be followed while admitting the members as well as conferring right to vote, upon them. The minimum standing of a member to be enrolled as a voter is provided under Rule 18 of the Rules. Earlier, it was twelve months and it is now stated to be thirty days. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies, in exercise of powers under Section 4(2) of the Act, issues instructions from time to time for proper and eﬀective implementation of the Act and the Rules. Such instructions are invariably, to be in conformity with the relevant provisions of law. They would only supplement further details for eﬀective functioning of the societies. It is, no doubt, true that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies issued proceedings, dated 07.06.2000, stipulating guidelines to be followed by the Cooperative Housing Societies. It is represented by the learned counsel for respondents 5 to 13 that based on the amendments caused to Rule 18 of the Rules and other provisions, modified instructions were also issued on 15.07.2005. This Court cannot decide as to the validity of the membership, much less the eligibility of the members so admitted to be included in the voters list. It is for the authorities concerned to take necessary steps, duly following the relevant provisions of law as well as the instructions issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that (a) it shall be open to the petitioner to canvass his grievance as regards the alleged illegality of the membership before the competent authority under the Act and the Rules; (b) the voters list for the society shall be prepared, strictly in accordance with Rule 18 of the Rules and the instructions issued by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies from time to time, including those in proceedings, dated 07.06.2000 and 15.07.2005; (c) if any enquiry into the matter is going on, it shall be open to the petitioner as well as respondents 5 to 13 to put forward their contentions before the authority concerned. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:14.10.2008. Note: Issue cc in two days. (B/o) kdl