HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16781 of 2010 Dated: 27-07-2010 Between: A.K.Prabhakar Reddy. … Petitioner And The District Co-operative Officer/Joint Registrar, Chittoor District & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16781 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner, who worked as a Special Category Assistant in the District Co-operative Central Bank, Chittoor, questions the show cause notice, dated 28.06.2010, issued by the 2nd responent-Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, in Rc.No.279/2001. The petitioner, earlier, had worked in the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society (PACS), Thodathara, which is presently merged with Diguvamagham PACS. In the special audit reports for the years 1999-2000, 2000- 2001 and 2001-2002, certain allegations of misappropriation were made against the petitioner, and pointing out such lapses, the impugned notice is issued in exercise of powers under Section 60(1) of the A.P. Co- operative Societies Act, 1964, calling upon the petitioner as to why an amount of Rs.4,76,117/- should not be recovered from him with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of issuance of the said notice. The impugned notice is questioned mainly on the ground that during the service of the petitioner, earlier, when an order was passed against him alleging misappropriation, it was set aside by the appellate Tribunal vide its orders in C.T.A.No.1 of 2006, and in that view of the matter, it is not open for the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings on the same allegations. Further, it is submitted that though the petitioner was under suspension for some time, at no point of time, the respondents have initiated proceedings against him, but the impugned proceedings are initiated under Section 60 (1) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, after the retirement of the petitioner. I have perused the earlier orders passed by the Co- operative Tribunal in C.T.A.No.1 of 2006. It shows that earlier, when there was an order against the petitioner under Section 60 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, he approached the Tribunal by filing an appeal in C.T.A.No.1 of 2006, which was allowed by the Tribunal by setting aside the orders passed against the petitioner. However, it is to be noticed that the said proceedings, which ended in favour of the petitioner in C.T.A.No.1 of 2006, does not relate to the charges levelled against him in the impugned notice, dated 28.06.2010, issued in Rc.No.279/2001. In that view of the matter, if any misappropriations are noticed, it is always open for the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings with regard to the charges, which are not covered in the earlier proceedings initiated against the petitioner. The further ground taken by the petitioner that he was placed under suspension and till his retirement no steps are taken, is also no ground to entertain this writ petition. It is to be noticed that the impugned notice, dated 28.06.2010, is only a show cause notice issued under Section 60(1) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, and in view of the nature of the charges and allegations made against the petitioner, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned proceedings at this stage. As the petitioner approached this Court against the show cause notice, I deem it appropriate to permit him to file his explanation to the impugned show cause notice within a period of six weeks from today. If any such explanation is filed, the same shall be considered before passing final orders pursuant to the impugned notice, dated 28.06.2010, issued in Rc.No.279/2001. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 27th July 2010 ajr