IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 3444 of 2001 Between: J.Subba Rao S/oSurya Rao Secretary N.Kothapally PACS, Uppalaguptam Mandal, E.G.Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dist Coop. Officer, Kakinada, E.G.Dist. 2 The Divisional Coop. Officer, Amalapuram, E.G.Dist. 3 N.Kothapalli PACS, Uppalaguptam Mandal, Rep by its Chairman, E.G.Dist. .....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 more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the R2 in issuing the impugned action of the R2 in issuing the impugned Prod Rc.No.941/93-C, dt 19-9-94 on the file of the R2 and consequential execution procd U/s 60 of the A.P.C.S.Act while he himself acting as complainant and prosecution witness (i.e. playing the role of judge and Prosecutor) as highly illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction and violative of art. 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.E.VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : ORDER: Petitioner challenges the proceedings issued under Section 60(1) of the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act (for brevity, ‘the Act’) for surcharge against him. 2. Though the petitioner raised several grounds in this Writ Petition, the proceedings in this Writ Petition show that interim stay granted on 01-03-2001 against the recovery was operative only for a period of four weeks and after its expiry in April, 2001, there has been no interim order in force. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents represents that the entire amount as per the surcharge proceedings has been recovered and the E.P. as well as the account has been closed. 4. In view of these circumstances, therefore, nothing further survives to be adjudicated in this Writ Petition. 5. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Even otherwise against the impugned order, an appeal lies under the Act and if the petitioner is still aggrieved, it is open for him to prefer such a statutory appeal. ____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J 11th December, 2008. Tsy To 1 The Dist Coop. Officer, Kakinada, E.G.Dist. 2 The Divisional Coop. Officer, Amalapuram, E.G.Dist. 3 The Chairman, N.Kothapalli PACS, Uppalaguptam Mandal, E.G.Dist. 4. CCs to the GP for Cooperation. 5. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{PRASAD}