THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.4369 OF 2009 DATED 7TH JULY, 2011 BETWEEN I.Seetharamaswamy …Petitioner And The Deputy Registrar of Co-op. Societies, Eluru, West Godavari District, and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.4369 OF 2009 ORDER: The former Chairman of Rangapuram Primary Agricultural Co- operative Society, Rangapuram, Lingapalem Mandal, West Godavari District, filed this writ petition challenging the surcharge order dated 15.10.2008 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Eluru, under Section 60(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 1964’). This Court, by order dated 04.03.2009, granted interim suspension of the impugned surcharge order. The Rangapuram Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, Rangapuram, got itself impleaded as the fourth respondent in the writ petition vide order dated 28.04.2011 and filed WVMP No.2104 of 2011 to vacate the order of interim suspension granted by this Court. The respondent authorities also advanced the same prayer in WVMP No.2220 of 2009. With the consent of the learned counsel, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal. The petitioner challenged the impugned surcharge order on the ground that the same was founded upon an enquiry instituted under Section 51 of the Act of 1964 during the pendency of surcharge proceedings already initiated on the basis of an inspection under Section 52 of the Act of 1964, wherein the Secretary of the Society alone was found responsible. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the institution of a Section 51 enquiry against the petitioner is consequently invalid in law. It is pertinent to note that a surcharge order passed under Section 60 of the Act of 1964 is appealable under Section 76 thereof before the Co-operative Tribunal constituted under Section 75 of the Act. The issue sought to be raised by the petitioner can as well be raised by him before the appellate authority. Article 226 of the Constitution is not meant to short-circuit or circumvent statutory procedures [ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDAN NAGAR v. DUNLOP INDIA LTD.[1]]. Further, the petitioner would be better off availing the appellate remedy which would allow him to raise grounds based on factual aspects which cannot be gone into by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is therefore misconceived and is accordingly dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the appellate remedy under Section 76 of the Act of 1964. As the petitioner enjoyed the protection of the interim order granted by this Court during the pendency of this writ petition, the impugned surcharge order dated 15.10.2008 shall remain suspended upto a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court to enable the petitioner to invoke the appellate remedy. The petitioner would be at liberty to seek interlocutory intervention by the Co-operative Tribunal thereafter. Parties shall bear their own costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 7TH JULY, 2011. Note: Issue CC by Monday. B/O VGSR/PGS [1] AIR 1985 SC 330