IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14656 of 2008 Between: 1 Abdul Gani S/o.Shake Noor Ahammed Lam(Post) Tadikonda(M) Guntur District 2 Outapalli Moulali S/o.Karim Lam(Post) Guntur District 3 Bobbapalli Mohammad Khasmi S/o.Bobapalli Mastan 4 Bobbapalli Shaik Azez S/o.Bobapalli Shake 5 Chejarala Aallabakshi S/o.Chejarla Kashim 6 Gujjalapudi Mohammad Hanif S/o.Gujjarlapudi Khasim 7 Gujjalapudi Allabakshi S/o.Gujjarlapudi Kamalsahed 8 Gujjalapudi Ameer S/o.Gujjarlapudi Khasim 9 Gujjalapudi Mabuta S/o.Gujjarlapudi Khasim 10 Gujjalapudi Makaranjee S/o.Gujjarlapudi Babe Sahed 11 Gujjalapudi Suileman S/o.Gujjarlapudi Bikari ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Societies Guntur,Guntur District 2 The Lam Labour Contract Cooperative Society Ltd Reg.No.I.1996 LAM) Tadikonda(M) Guntur District Rep.by its President 3 A.P Cooperative Tribunal at Vijayawada Rep.by its Presiding Officer .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue any appropriate writ,order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the order of returning of the appeal dt.3-7-2008 by 3rd respodent in SR No.341/2008 in unnumbered O.A of 2008 as being arbitrary illegal contrary to the provisions of the A.P Cooperative Societies act 1964 and also violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to entertain and dispose of the same on merits and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Petitioners herein made applications under Section 19 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, for membership of the second respondent-Society. The request of the petitioners was rejected by the Society and all the petitioners were served with separate orders for certain reasons stated there under. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners earlier filed W.P.No. 12744 of 2008, seeking declaration that the action of the second respondent-Society in rejecting the membership sought by the petitioners is arbitrary and illegal. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court by an order- dated 19.6.2008 granting leave and liberty to the petitioners to work out the alternative remedy available under the statute. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the A.P. Cooperative Tribunal, Vijawada, under Section 76(1) of the Act, questioning the action of the second respondent in rejecting their applications for membership. However, the Tribunal declined to entertain the said appeal and returned the same vide order dated 3.7.2008 directing the petitioners herein, to approach the Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Section 61 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, since there is a dispute between the members and the society. The said order passed by the Tribunal dated 3.7.2008 is under challenge in this Writ Petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent society. The learned counsel for the petitioners while submitting that since the petitioners herein are not members of the second respondent society, Section 61(1) of the Act is not attracted, contended that the Tribunal committed a grave error in returning the appeal as not maintainable. On a careful reading of Section 61 of the Act, I find force in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Admittedly, as on today, the petitioners herein are not members of the second respondent-Society and therefore no dispute can be raised before the Registrar under Section 61 of the Act. The applications made by them under Sub Section (2A) of Section 19 of the Act were rejected by the second respondent Society in exercise of power conferred under Sub- Section (3) of Section 19 of the Act. Hence as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, an appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal under Section 76 of the Act. It is also relevant to note that while disposing of the Writ Petition No. 12744 of 2008, it was left open to the petitioners to work out the alternative remedy available under the statute but there was no direction as such, to raise a dispute under Section 61 of the Act. Hence the Tribunal below was not justified in returning the appeal. Under the circumstances, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent –Tribunal to entertain the appeal of the petitioners herein and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioners as well as the second respondent, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Keeping in view the apprehension expressed by the petitioners that the elections are likely to be conducted to the second respondent- Society in the meanwhile, it is made clear that in case any such elections are proposed, the petitioners are at liberty to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law for redressal of their grievance. _____________________________ MS G. ROHINI ,J Dt. 11.07.2008 KA Note: Furnish copy in two days. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Societies Guntur,Guntur District 2 The Lam Labour Contract Cooperative Society Ltd Reg.No.I.1996 LAM) Tadikonda(M) Guntur District Rep.by its President 3 A.P Cooperative Tribunal at Vijayawada Rep.by its Presiding Officer 4. CC to G. P. for Cooperation, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5. Two CD copies.