THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.A.No.887 of 2009 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Smt Justice T.Meena Kumari) The present writ appeal is preferred by the appellants against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.M.P.No.15070 of 2009 in W.P.No.11705 of 2009 on 16.6.2009. The appellants are the writ petitioners. They have filed an appeal in O.A.39 of 2007 seeking to set aside the surcharge order vide Rc.No.650/2001-D(1), dated 1.4.2006 issued by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Peddapuram. The Tribunal having observed that the appellants have failed to adduce any material except the self serving statements to show as to why the enquiry report shall not be considered and apart from that, the appeal is initiated after the sale in execution proceedings and the conduct of the appellants is not a bona fide one and there is no illegality in the order impugned therein, dismissed the O.A. Having aggrieved by the same, they have filed the present writ petition seeking to set aside the order passed in O.A.No.39 of 2007 on 30.4.2009 confirming the surcharge orders in R.C.No.650/2001/D1, dated 1.4.2006 of the 1st respondent. Along with the said writ petition, they have also filed W.P.M.P.No.15070 of 2009 seeking to stay all further proceedings in pursuance of the surcharge orders of the 1st respondent in Rc.No.650/2001/D1, dated 1.4.2006 including confirmation of sale pertaining to the House No.6-536, Rangampeta village and Mandal, East Godavari District. The learned single Judge dismissed the said W.P.M.P. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ appeal is preferred by the appellants. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the entire material available on record. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that stay was granted during the pendency of the O.A in question and that the appellants are continuously in possession and enjoyment of the property in question and in view of the dismissal of the O.A., there is every likelihood of dispossessing the appellants and therefore, if the surcharge proceedings including the further proceedings, are not stayed, the very purpose of filing the present writ petition, which is pending before the learned single Judge, will be defeated. In the present facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the proceedings leading to filing of the O.A and the present writ petition and in view of the pendency of the main writ petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we feel that it is a fit case wherein stay can be granted, but subject to imposing a condition. Accordingly, there shall be stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the surcharge orders of the 1st respondent in Rc.No.650/2001/D1, dated 1.4.2006 including confirmation of sale pertaining to the property in question, on condition of the appellants depositing 1/3 of the amount alleged to have been misappropriated. Subject to the above direction, this writ appeal is disposed of. However, it is just and proper to direct the Registry to post the main writ petition on 25th August, 2009 for final hearing. ____________________ (T.MEENA KUMARI,J) ____________________ (SANJAY KUMAR, J) rkk dated: 7.7.2009