HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.19745 of 2010 Date : 29-3-2011 Between : Fishermen Co-operative Society, Rasnam village, Yalal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, represented by its President Sri Bandaru Salappa .. Petitioner and The Commissioner of Fisheries, Mutsya Bhavan, Shanthi Nagar, Vijay Nagar colony, Hyderabad and another .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Ms.M.Vidyavathi Counsel for respondents : Government Pleader for Fisheries The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to set-aside notice vide proceedings No.707/B/2010, dated 19-4-2010 of respondent No.2. The petitioner is a fishermen co-operative society. Respondent No.2 has issued notice dated 19-4-2010 wherein it has called upon the 40 persons who were admitted by the petitioner as members to show cause why it shall not be declared that their admission by the petitioner- society is invalid. Questioning the said proceeding, the petitioner-society filed the present Writ Petition. In my opinion, the Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed for two reasons, namely, (i) that the impugned notice is addressed to the 40 persons who were admitted as members into the petitioner-society. It is only those persons, if at all, who are aggrieved by such notice. The petitioner, in my opinion, has no locus to question the said notice; (ii) that the impugned proceedings are in the nature of a show cause notice. It is therefore open to the persons to whom the notice has been addressed, to file appropriate objections before respondent No.2. Ms.M.Vidyavathi, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as the contents of the notice are ambiguous and it is not clear therefrom that the same is addressed to the 40 members or to the petitioner, the present Writ Petition is filed on the premise that it has been addressed to the petitioner. She further submitted that under Section 21 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, "the Act") it is the petitioner-society which alone is vested with the jurisdiction and power to remove the members and that therefore respondent No.2 has no power or authority to issue the impugned notice. In my opinion, a reading of the impugned notice as a whole does not leave any doubt that the same was addressed to the 40 persons who were admitted as members into the petitioner-society. Therefore, the petitioner-society cannot be heard to have any grievance against the said notice. With regard to the second submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Fisheries invited my attention to Rule 20 of A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules 1964 under which the Registrar is vested with the power to declare that any person who is disqualified to be a member of the society shall cease to be a member of such society from the date of such disqualification. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said rule runs counter to Section 21 of the Act. I am afraid, this court need not go into this question at this stage because, as noted above, the impugned proceedings are in the nature of a show cause notice. The aggrieved party is entitled to raise all legally permissible grounds including the one relating to power of respondent No.2 to declare any person as disqualified. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the aggrieved persons to whom the impugned notice is addressed to file objections before respondent No.2. ____________________ C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy.,J Date : 29-3-2011 AM