THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.2005 OF 2010 Dated: 17.02.2010 Between: G. Srihari and another … Petitioners And 1. Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, Fisheries Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.2005 OF 2010 ORDER : The writ petitioners claim to be the members of the Fishermen Co-operative Society, Vemulakonda Village, Valigonda Mandal, Nalgonda District. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the respondents 1 to 4 in considering the representation of the petitioners dated 29.12.2009 for supersession of the Managing Committee of the Vemulakonda Fishermen Co- operative Society (for short, ‘Society’). It is pleaded by the petitioners that they along with 3 other members by name S. Venkatesham, A. Sattaiah and G. Maraiah made a detailed representation dated 29.12.2009 requesting the respondents 1 to 4 herein to supersede the Managing Committee of the Society bringing to their notice various irregularities in the administration of the society. Some of the allegations included that the President of the Society had failed to conduct the elections since 2001, continued ineligible members, misappropriated the funds of the society and etc. It is alleged that the respondents 1 to 4 failed to consider their representation and no steps have been taken as contemplated under law. Though no counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4, the Fishermen Co-operative Society, Vemulakonda Village, represented by its President got himself impleaded as respondent No.5 and filed a counter-affidavit denying all the allegations made by the petitioners. It is further stated that 7 members out of total 58 members are differing with the General Body of the society and they have been creating litigation to the detriment of the interest of the society. It is alleged that the said 7 members are chronic litigants and the present writ petition has been filed by them with all false and frivolous allegations. It is also pleaded that 3 members out of the signatories to the representation dated 29.12.2009 were removed from the primary membership of the society on 21.8.2009 itself. That apart one of the signatories by name S. Venkatesham got himself impleaded to W.P.No.5837 of 2009 which also arises out of the same cause of action. It is also contended that since W.P.No.5837 of 2009 is still pending on the file of this Court, the present writ petition is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed in limini. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. As could be seen from the material available on record, the matter appears to have a chequered history and series of writ petitions came to be filed in this Court from time to time. However, it is to be noticed that what is complained by the petitioners in this writ petition is the alleged inaction on the part of the respondents 1 to 4 in considering their representation dated 29.12.2009 for supersession of the Managing Committee of the Society. Though it is contended by the respondent No.5 that out of the five members who made the representation, three were removed from the primary membership of the society on 21.8.2009, it is not in dispute that the two writ petitioners herein are continuing as members of the society. In the circumstances, the objection raised by the respondent No.5 as to the maintainability of the writ petition cannot be accepted. I am also unable to accept the further contention that W.P.No.5837 of 2009 is also based on the same cause of action and therefore the present writ petition is frivolous. Section 34 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 provides for supersession of the Committee and it is for the Registrar to exercise the said powers in the circumstances specified thereunder. Therefore it is not necessary for this Court to go into merits of the case and express any opinion as to the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made by the petitioners in the representation dated 29.12.2009. It is for the Registrar to take appropriate decision after hearing the petitioners as well as the respondent No.5 with regard to the alleged irregularities in the administration of the society. Needless to mention that pursuant to the notice that may be issued during the enquiry, it is always open to the 5th respondent to raise all the objections as available under law. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioners in the representation dated 29.12.2009, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 2 to 4 to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 29.12.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as the respondent No.5. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 17.02.2010 gbs