IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C. V. RAMULU Writ Petition No.6631 of 2005 Dated: 24-08-2006 Between: State Bank of Hyderabad Employees Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Regd.No.(TAB-451) Saidabad, Unit –III, Hyderabad represented by its Person Incharge Mr. K.V.Ramnath S/o Sastry aged about 52 years, Occ: Assistant Registrar/Person Incharge O/o The Devisional Cooperative Officer, Golkonda Division, III Floor, Block M-7, A.P. Housing Board, Mojamjahi Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. ... Petitioner and 1. The Deputy Registrar, Golkonda Division (formerly Dy. Registrar (Housing), III Floor, Block M-7, A.P. Housing Board, Mojamjahi Road, Nampally, Hyderabad and another. ... Respondents ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus to declare the action of the first respondent in issuing a certificate under Section 70A of Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’) being Rc.No.2069/2001-G dated 28-08-2001 in favour of the second respondent without any notice and contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. It appears that the second respondent was initially a member of the petitioner Society. However, when she was not allotted with any plot she raised a dispute before the Arbitrator, who passed an Award dated 18-02-1982 in A.R.C.No.35 of 1981 directing the petitioner Society to refund the amounts deposited by her. Pursuant to that, she filed E.P.No.3909 of 1982 before the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Housing), Hyderabad and the same is still pending. It seems that, in the meanwhile, one K.V.P. Ch. Sarma raised an arbitration dispute against the cancellation of allotment of plot in his favour, which was the subject matter of A.R.C.No.53 of 1998. The second respondent herein also seems to have got impleaded herself in the said ARC stating that once the plot allotted in favour of K.V.P. Ch.Sarma is cancelled, she is entitled for the same and the said A.R.C. was disposed on 17-07-2000. Thereafter, the second respondent filed an application for issuance of certificate under Section 70A of the Act and got the order in A.R.C.No.53 of 1998 modified by order dated 30-08-2003. Pursuant to that, the second respondent filed E.P.No.202 of 2003 for execution of the award dated 18-02-1992 passed in A.R.C.No.35 of 1981. Further, no notice was issued to the petitioner Society while issuing certificate under Section 70-A of the Act or modifying the order dated 30-08-2003. 3. Prima facie, it appears that once an E.P. is filed pursuant to the order passed in A.R.C.No.35 of 1981 there is no necessity for issuance of another certificate under Section 70A of the Act in the present arbitration proceedings. Apart from that admittedly no notice has been issued to the person in charge of the petitioner Society. In view of the same, I am of the opinion that the impugned orders dated 17-07-2000 and 30-08-2003 are liable to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration. 4. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned orders dated 17-07-2000 and 30-08-2003 are set aside and the matter is remitted to the first respondent for consideration of the matter afresh after putting the parties on notice and hearing them personally. ____________________ JUSTICE C. V. RAMULU Dt.24-08-2006 GLV