THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25145 of 2010 Dated 08th October, 2010 Between: Kodru Ramanadh Babu and others …Petitioners And The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Visakhapatnam and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Mr.V.V.N. Narayana Rao Counsel for respondent No.1: Government Pleader for Cooperation Counsel for Respondent No.2:-- The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the order dated 23.09.2010 passed in M.A.No.16 of 2010 in O.A.No.30 of 2010 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Tribunal at Visakhapatnam. I have heard Sri V.V.N. Narayana Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation. The petitioners suffered a surcharge order under Section 60 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’) passed on 27.05.2010 by respondent No.1. A perusal of the said surcharge order shows that no allegations of misappropriation of society’s funds or benami transactions were made against the petitioners, who were the members of the Managing Committee at the relevant time. Under Rule 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1994, the Cooperative Tribunal shall not grant interim stay of the orders passed by the departmental authorities unless the applicant produces a cash deposit of not less than 50% of the surcharge amount or furnishes security of equal value as directed by the Tribunal in cases relating to misappropriation of amounts or sanction of benami loans. As noted above, the surcharge order was not passed on either of the two allegations. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have considered the petitioners’ application for stay on its own merits in stead of strictly adhering to Rule 11 of the Rules and directing payment of 50% of the (misappropriated) amount. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 23.09.2010 of the Tribunal is set aside. The Tribunal is directed to reconsider the petitioners’ application for interim stay without reference to Rule 11 of the Rules and dispose of the same after hearing the petitioners and respondent No.2 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.32136 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 08th October, 2010 GHN