THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5885 of 2009 Dated:22nd February, 2010 Between: Vustela Rama Devi ..... Petitioner AND 1. Chityala Srinivasa Reddy & Ors. .....Respondents *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5885 of 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 11.09.2009 passed in I.A.No.2446 of 2008 in O.P.No.413 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Nalgonda, whereby and whereunder the learned District Judge dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Order VII, Rule 11 r/w. Sec.151 CPC seeking rejection of the original petition. 2. The 1st respondent herein, who is the petitioner in O.P.No.413 sought for declaration that the admission of the respondents 8 and 9 as the members of the Tejasree Educational Society as null and void and for declaration that the resolution dated 19.05.2008 purported to have been passed by the Tejasree Educational Society, removing him from the post of Principal/Correspondent of Teja Talent School and appointing Vustela Rama Devi, petitioner herein, as the Principal/Correspondent of Teja Talent School, as null and void and not binding on him. It is the contention of the original petitioner that himself and respondents 1 to 7 therein are the members of the Tejasree Educational Society, registered under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Public Societies Registration Act. The said Society was formed the aims and objectives like 1) rural educational development for economically backward students; 2) to educate the rural people about the Government welfare programmes; 3) to bring out merit students from rural areas, 4) for improvement of the girls literacy percentage and to educate the people, those who are below the poverty line and to achieve such aims and objectives, the Society established a school under the name and style of ‘Teja Talent School’ at Kodada Town and Mandal, Naglonda District. The 1st respondent herein, who is the petitioner in O.P., claims to be the General Secretary of the Society. The petitioner herein and 7 others filed I.A.No.2446 of 2008 contending that the post of Correspondent-cum-Principal of the Teja Talent School is not part of Society and that the petitioner is only an employee and therefore, the application filed by him under Section 23 of the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001, is not maintainable. The respondents herein filed counter resisting the application. The learned District Judge, on considering the scope of Section 23 of the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001, proceeded to dismiss the application, by order dated 11.09.2009. The said order is assailed in this revision. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and perused the order impugned in the revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the respondents herein are only employees and therefore, the original petition filed by the 1st respondent herein under Section 23 of the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001, is not maintainable. 5. The petitioner herein and 7 others filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11 r/w.Sec.151 CPC seeking rejection of the O.P. Order VII, Rule 11 CPC reads as hereunder: “11. Rejection of plaint.— The plaint shall be rejected in the following cases:- (a) where it does not disclose a cause of action; (b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; (c) where the relief claimed is properly valued but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to supply the requisite stamp-paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; (d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law; (e) where it is not filed in duplicate; (f) where the plaintiff fails to comply with the provisions of rule 9; [Provided that the time fixed by the Court for the correction of the valuation or supplying of the requisite stamp-paper shall not be extended unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded, is satisfied that the plaintiff was prevented by any cause of an exceptional nature for correcting the valuation or supplying the requisite stamp-paper, as the case may be, within the time fixed by the Court and that refusal to extend such time would cause grave injustice to the plaintiff.” None of the conditions stipulated above for rejection of the O.P. are canvassed by the petitioner. The petitioner contended that the 1st respondent herein being employee is not entitled to invoke Section 23 of the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001. It is to be noted that the 1st respondent herein claims to be the General Secretary of the Society and he questions the admission of Vustela Anthi Reddy and Sriram Saidaiah (Respondents 8 and 9 herein) as members of the Society. The trial Court considered the material brought on record in right perspective and proceeded to dismiss the application filed by the petitioner under Order VII, Rule 11 r/w. Sec.151 CPC. I do not see any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the O.P. as expeditiously as possible. Hence, there shall a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the O.P. as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:22nd February, 2010. cs THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5885 of 2009 Dated:22nd February, 2010