THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA W.P.No.28318 of 2009 2nd February, 2010 Between:- V. Yellaswamy and others .. Petitioners And The A.P.Cooperative Housing Societies Federation Limited., (A.P.House Fed) rep. by its Recovery Officer, 1-8/B/26, Baghlingampally, Hyderabad .. Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA W.P.No.28318 of 2009 ORDER:- This Court ordered notice before admission on 21-1-2010. 2. Counter affidavit had been filed. 3. Heard Sri M.M.M.Srinivas, the learned Counsel for the writ petitioners and Sri Maturi Aravind, the learned Counsel representing respondent. 4. This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus declaring the notices issued by the respondents to the petitioners No. 1 and 2 dt.28- 8-2009 and trying to proceed against other petitioners without notice is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the said notices and further direct the respondent and his subordinates not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners in any manner for the alleged arrears and pass such other suitable orders. 5. It is the case of the writ petitioners these petitioners are from poorer and weaker Sections and residents of Agency area. It is also averred in para 3 that while so in the year 1982 the respondent had promised to provide financial assistance for construction of pacca houses. Further it is stated that though they had promised to grant a sums of Rs.45,000/- per each person at that time, whereas they had released only Rs.20,000/- for the purpose of construction of basement, thereafter despite repeated requests made by the beneficiaries, they did not chose to extend the benefit and consequently entire scheme had been abandoned and it was a failure scheme. Further it is also stated that because of the inaction of the respondent, the petitioners had sustained loss of initial margin money and even basement construction had been spoiled. Due to financial difficulties, the petitioners could not mobilize further funds. It is further stated that the petitioners residing by raising huts and that frequently for their livelihood, they used to go to other places and they are not in a position to maintain even their families. 6. Further it is stated that curiously after lapse of 27 years, the respondent had issued impugned notice to the petitioners No.1 and 2 demanding alleged arrears of loan amount i.e., Rs.1,76,153-52 ps., from petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,08,167-63 ps., from petitioner No.2. It is also stated that the principal amount was Rs.46,721/- and Rs.82,724/- (as pr notice) whereas the interest is in lakhs. Further it is stated that the value of the land property is not more than Rs.30,000/- whereas the respondent is insisting them to pay huge amount which is ex facie illegal and arbitrary. 7. Further it is averred that while serving the impugned notices, the subordinates of the respondent threatened the petitioners stating that they can take away their buffaloes and other household articles etc. It is unfortunate that the respondent corporation having failed to assist poor people within time who are staying in Agency area, issuance of impugned proceedings after lapse of 27 years and threatened them even to remove household articles clearly amounts to harassment. It is also stated that some of the petitioners had no knowledge about the sanction of loan since beneficiaries died long ago. Petitioners No.4 to 7 had no knowledge about the sanction of loans and only on information given by the respondent officials, they came to know about these proceedings. Further it is also stated that without issuing any prior notice and without furnishing statement of accounts, issuing impugned notices is ex facie illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are not liable for the said amount and the impugned demand is barred by limitation. It is also stated that the respondent instead of protecting interest of poor families, insisting and threatening the petitioners to pay alleged arrears without providing financial assistance for constructing houses, as such as a last resort, the petitioners are approached this Court. 8. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is stated that the Writ Petition itself is not maintainable. Further it is stated that the writ petitioners had not filed any document to show that they belonged to low income groups of families and they have no permanent houses. It is also stated that the petitioners are having pakka houses. Further it is stated that the duty of the Recovery Officer is only to execute the decrees passed in favour of the A.P. House Fed or the Societies who have obtained loans from the Housefed. In the instant case, as per the records, the writ petitioners are the members of the Amaravathi Cooperative Housing Society, Amrabad, Mahaboobnagar District. Hence, the allegations made against the respondent are false and not maintainable under the eye of law. In this connection, it is stated that the decrees were passed against these writ petitioners in the year 1995 and they were challenged by the writ petitioners before the Cooperative Tribunal, Hyderabad and the same were dismissed in the year 1996 itself. Further it is stated that the said orders were not challenged by the writ petitioners. Hence, the orders passed by the Arbirator are final. E.Ps., are pending for execution. This respondent issued notices as per the provisions of the A.P.C.S.Act, 1964. Hence the limitation does not arise. The rest of the allegations made are denied. It is also further stated that Decrees were passed against these writ petitioners and the said writ petitioners were also challenged before the Cooperative Tribunal, Hyderabad and the said proceedings were dismissed. As far as the aspect of furnishing of any statement of account, it is stated that the writ petitioners are ought to have obtained the statement of accounts from their Society from which they availed the loan. Further specific stand had been taken that the mere notice cannot be challenged in any Court of law. 9. The learned Counsel representing respondent also placed strong reliance on the decision of this Court in SMT.J.PADMAVATHI v. THE A.P.COOPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION LTD. REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER (W.P.NO.21163/2003). 10. The undernoted documents also had been placed before this Court:- 1) Certificate under Section 71 of the A.P.C.S.Act, V.Yellaswamy, dt.26-8-1995 2) C.T.A.No.160/95 filed by V.Yellaswamy, dt.29-3-1996. 3) Form-6 and Form No.2 of V.Yellaswamy, dt.28-12-1999. 4) Certificate under Section 71 of the A.P.C.S.Act, Mohd.Salem, dt.26-8-1995. 5) C.T.A.No.160/95 filed by Mohd.Salem, dt.29-3-1996. 6) Form-6 and Form No.2 of Mohd.Salem, dt.23-3-1996. 7) Certificate under Section 71 of the A.P.C.S.Act, R.Krishnaiah, dt.26-8-1995 8) C.T.A.No.161/95 filed by R.Krishnaiah, dt.29-3-1996. 9) Form-6 and Form No.2 of R.Krishnaiah, dt.28-12-1999. 10) Certificate under Section 71 of the A.P.C.S.Act, K.Thirupathaiah, dt.26-8-1995 11) C.T.A.No.164/95 filed by K.Thirupathaiah, dt.29-3-96. 12) Form-6 of K.Thirupathaiah, dt.28-12-1999. 13) Certificate under Section 71 of the A.P.C.S.Act, M.Rangaiah, dt.26-8-1995 14) Form-6 and Form No.2 of M.Rangaiah, dt.28-12-1999 15) Certificate under Section 71 of the A.P.C.S.Act, M.Shankerlingam, dt.26-8-1995 16) Form-6 and Form No.2 of M.Shankerlingam,dt.28-12-99 11. In the light of the series of events, this Court is thoroughly satisfied that the grounds averred in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are not tenable. But however a request is being made by the Counsel for petitioners for furnishing of the statement of accounts and the outstanding dues of the respective petitioners. If a request is made by the petitioners in this regard, let the respondent furnish the statement of accounts showing the particulars and details of the respective payments to be made through the concerned society. 12. Accordingly, with the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ Justice P.S.Narayana 2nd Februar, 2010 smr