IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 21908 of 1995 Between: 1 GADIPALLI RAJAMALLU, S/O VENKAT RAJYAM SHATRAJI HANDLOOM WEAVERS, COOP-PRODUCTION SALES SOCIETY , MYSAMMAGUDI,WARANGAL 2 A.LAKSHMI NARAYANA S/ORAMAYYA SHATRAJI NAVAR HAND LOOM WEAVERS, COOP PRODUCTION &SALES SOCIETY LTD. L.B NAGAR WARANGAL DIST. 3 V.RAJAIAH ,S/O VENKATESAM, VENKATESHWARA TERRYCOT HANDLOOM WEAVERS, COOP PRODUCTION AND SALES SOCIETY LTD. PEDDAPENDYALA MANDAL WARANGAL DISTRICT 4 M.SRINIVAS S/O VENKATAIAH RAJARAJESHWARI TERRYCOT HANDLOOM WEAVERS COOP PRODUCTION &SALES SOCIETY LTD PEDAPENDYALA ,WARANGAL DIST 5 P.RAMA LINGAM S/O VEERAIAH LAKSHMI TERRICOT HANDLOOM WEAVERS COOP.SOCIETY,KESHAVA PURAM WARANGAL DIST. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR(ARBITRATOR) OFFICER-ON- SPL.DUTY, THE WARANGAL DIST.COOP.CENTRAL BANK, SUBEDARI, HANAMKONDA WARANGAL DISTRICT 2 THE GENERAL MANAGER, THE WARANGAL DIST.COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., SUBEDARI,HANAMKONDA WARANGAL DIST. .....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 it is prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction, one in the nature of mandamus i)declaring the action of the respondent-1 in passing the impugned proceedings vide Arc.Nos.828/95-96,813/95-96,822/95-96,815/95-96 &800/95-96 dt. 30/8/1995 as arbitratory ,illegal,without jurisdiction and the same may be set a side ; ii) costs be order to the petitioners ;and pass such other orders appropriate in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.K.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents.: MR.J.VENKATESWARA REDDY ORAL ORDER: The petitioners herein challenge the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30-8-1995 wherein it was adjudicated that the petitioners are liable to pay certain amounts mentioned in the respective proceedings to the 2nd respondent. When the matter came up for hearing today, since the impugned proceedings are self-explanatory that they are passed against the respective Societies and not in the personal capacity of the petitioners, on a query put by the Court, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have filed the present writ petition in their personal capacity and not in their official capacity as Presidents of the respective Societies and they have no objection if the proceedings are enforced against the respective Societies. In view of the stand taken by the petitioners, which is not opposed by the learned standing counsel for the respondents, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with an observation that 2nd respondent is at liberty to initiate further proceedings, as per the orders of the 1st respondent, against the respective societies. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _________ 22-9-2004 asp To 1. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR(ARBITRATOR) OFFICER-ON- SPL.DUTY, THE WARANGAL DIST.COOP.CENTRAL BANK, SUBEDARI, HANAMKONDA WARANGAL DISTRICT 2 THE GENERAL MANAGER, THE WARANGAL DIST.COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD., SUBEDARI,HANAMKONDA WARANGAL DIST. 3. Two C.D. copies.