IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 7834 of 2008 Between: Y.Santhosha Rao S/o. Venkat Rao O/o. The Director of Accounts (Postal), Andra Circle, Dar Sadan, Abids, Hyd. R/o. Plot No. 131, Triveni Nagar, Meerpet(V), Saroornagar (M), R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Chief Accounts Officer, Administration-I, O/o. The Director of Accounts (Postal), Andhra Circle, Hyderabad. 2 The Divisional Co-operative Officer, Hyderabad East Division Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Person-in-Charge Committee, The Hyd. Postal Accounts And P&T, Audit Office Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Dak Sadan , Abids, Hyd. .....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 issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus a) To call for the records pertaining to the proceedings No. E.P.No.I/Hyd.PA, P&T/ECCS/2007-G, Dated 07.02.2008, the Proceedings No. E.P.No.I/Hyd.PA, P&T/ECCS/2007-G, Dated 21.02.2008, Proceedings Rc No. 289/2007-G, Dated 03.03.2008 and the consequential sale Proceedings No. E.P.No.I/Hyd.PA, P&T/ECCS/2007-G, Dated 13.03.2008 and the Proceedings No. E.P.No.I/Hyd.PA, P&T/ECCS/2007-G, Dated 13.03.2008 issued by the Respondent No.2 and set them aside, b) To direct the Respondent No.1 herein not to give objection for the recovery and disposal of the mortgaged Residential House pertaining to the petitioner herein on Plot No. 131 Triveninagar, Meerpet Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which is mortgaged on the name of the Hon'ble President of India c) To award costs, By Holding the action of the respondents herein bad, illegal, irrigational arbitrary, discriminatory, disproportionate, violative of the Rules to Regulate the Grant of Advance to Central Govt. Servants for Building Houses, violative of the Principles of Natural Justice and also violative of the Art.14, 16 21 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.NAGENDRA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KSRANI} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed to quash the proceedings dated 7.2.2008 and 13.3.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent and consequently direct the 1st respondent not to give No Objection Certificate for disposal of the petitioner’s residential House at Plot No.131 situated in Meerpet village, which is under mortgage. The petitioner asserts that he acquired a house-site at Plot No.131 admeasuring 229 square yards in S.Nos.132, 137, 138 and 139 situated in Meerpet village, Sarrornagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for which, he obtained house building advance from the 1st respondent-Asst. Chief Accounts Officer by mortgaging the house with plot. While so, the petitioner was elected as a Member of the Managing Committee of the Hyderabad Postal Accounts and Audit Office Cooperative Credit Society Limited in the elections held in the year 1993 and continued as such, and thereafter, he was elected as Secretary of the Society on 3.4.1998 and worked in that capacity upto 21.7.2000, and during his tenure, he was never entrusted with any responsibility to look after Society’s financial transactions. Later, the 2nd respondent-Divisional Cooperative Officer superceded the Managing Committee of the Society. It is stated that certain irregularities were found to have been committed in financial transactions. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that though he was not concerned with any financial transactions in the Society, the 1st respondent issued Proceedings dated 7.2.2008 for attachment and sale of his residential house in public auction scheduled to be held on 19.4.2008 and another Notice dated 13.3.2008 proposing to sell the petitioner’s immovable property. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The impugned orders dated 7.2.2008 and 13.3.2008 are a sequel to the surcharge order passed in the year 2006, against which, a statutory appeal lies under Section 76 of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1964. Dr.Raghu Kumar, who filed caveat on behalf of the 3rd respondent, has stated that the petitioner had already preferred C.T.A.No.31 of 2008 and the appellate authority is seized of the matter. Once an appeal is preferred, the proper course that is left to the petitioner is to seek stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the surcharge order. So long as the surcharge order is in existence, it is for the authorities to proceed in accordance with law. As it is submitted that the appeal itself is coming up for hearing tomorrow, the petitioner is hereby directed to avail his remedies in the appellate Court. If, for any reason, the stay petition in the appeal is not heard tomorrow, the appellate authority shall decide it on or before 19.4.2008 as the auction is scheduled to be held on that day. In terms of the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ 10.04.2008 Note: Furnish copy by tomorrow B/o bcj