IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 22737 of 2007 DATED: 25.1.2008 Between: G Venkateshwarlu petitioner and Government of A.P., Rep by its Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department, Secretariat , Hyderabad and others Respondents THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 22737 of 2007 ORAL ORDER: The present writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings of the third respondent dated 24.10.2007 postponing the elections of the fourth respondent society as illegal and contrary to provisions of Rule 22 ( C) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964. The petitioner is member of the fourth respondent society. Since the term of the present managing body was over, the second respondent issued proceedings dated 29.9.2007 appointing the third respondent as Election Officer and fixed the election schedule. Thereafter, the third respondent issued proceedings dated 24.10.2007 postponing the elections scheduled to be held on 3.11.2007, without assigning any reasons. Hence, the present writ petition. Learned counsel for petitioner Ms.Vidyavathi submitted that the impugned proceedings dated 24.10.2007 were issued without assigning any reasons for postponement of the elections and the same is contrary to Rule 22 (C) of the A.P. Coop Societies Act, which prescribe the conditions where under the elections can be postponed. It is further stated that the third respondent/election officer has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned orders, inasmuch as, the competent authority to postpone the elections is Government or the Election Authority i.e., the District Collector. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 admitting appointment of third respondent as Election Officer and stating that fishing operations were conducted in the Voilsingaram Tank and there are differences among the members and two representations were submitted for admission of new members, as such the elections of fourth respondent society were postponed. Further, an additional counter affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2, which is on similar lines as that of counter affidavit filed in the matter. However, it specifically stated that the elections were postponed due to non finalisation of the membership drive and that there is no influence for postponement of the elections. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Fisheries and perused the material available on record. The impugned order passed by the third respondent-Election Officer reads as under; “In compliance to the instructions of the Dy Director of Fisheries, Nalgonda contained in the reference 2nd cited, the proposed election of the Fishermen coop society Voilsingaram scheduled on 3.11.2007 are hereby postponed until further orders. A bare reading of the impugned order would indicate that there are no reasons mentioned for postponement of elections. Rule 22 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, deals with postponement of elections by the Government / Election Authority, which reads as under; “22 ( C ) (1) :-- Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the Government or the Election authority may direct the postponement of elections under one or more of the following circumstances. (i) Break down of law and order affecting the peaceful and lawful conduct of elections. (ii) Any natural calamity that prevents the conduct of elections particularly voters from participation in the elections (iii) Where there is reasonable apprehension that voters will not be allowed to vote frankly and freely. (b) The postponement shall be done only by issue of an order which shall specify the grounds of postponement. After such postponement the election process shall be recommenced when the conditions become conducive for re-commencing of election, by issue of an order by the Authority that has postponed the elections. The process will re-commence from the stage at where it was obstructed or interrupted. The issue as to postponement of election without specifying the grounds, was considered by this Court in M.Ramachandra Reddy and others Vs. Government of A.P. [1] and it was held that postponement of elections shall be only under any of grounds enumerated under sub-rule (1) of Rule 22-C of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules. The relevant portion reads as under; “Though there can be no dispute about the power conferred on the Government or the Election Authority under Rule 22-C to postpone the elections, it is relevant to note that such postponement shall be only under any of the grounds enumerated under sub –rule (1) of Rule 22-C. Hence, the power conferred on the Government under section 131 of the Act to give directions cannot be extended to interdict the election process on the grounds other than that are mentioned under Rule 22-C. There is no other provision under the Act which provides for postponement of elections. Therefore, postponement of elections merely on the basis of certain complaints received from the members of the society with regard to preparation of voters lists or alleged irregularities in granting of membership, being not permissible under the provisions of the Act and the Rules, cannot be ordered even in exercise of power under section 131 of the Act.” Though, no reasons are assigned in the impugned order, as per the counter affidavit filed in the matter, the elections were postponed due to non finalisation of the membership list, which is not a valid ground for postponement of elections in terms of the conditions laid down under Rule 22 (C ) of the Rules. There is also no material to show that the Government or the Election Authority has passed any orders to postpone the elections and merely on the instructions of Deputy Director of Fisheries, Nalgonda the proposed elections were postponed. Thus, the postponement of elections vide impugned orders dated 24.10.2007 is unjustified and the same is liable to be set aside and the same is hereby set aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to proceed further with the election process, from the stage where it was stopped. No costs. ____________ N.V.RAMANA,J DATE: 25.1.2008 TVK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 22737 of 2007 DATED: 25.1.2008 [1] 2006 (2) ALD 296