IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 14447 of 2008 Between: Fathenagar Land Colonisation Society for Ex-Service Men Fathenagar(V) Navipet(M) Nizamabad District,Rep.by its General Secretary Mohd. Muneeruddin S/o.Moinuddin Bhainsa,Adilabad District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P Rep. by its Deputy Registrar of Co- Operative Societies Nizambad,Nizamabad District 2 The Sub-Divisional Co-Operative Officer Nizamabad,Nizamabad District 3 The Welfare Officer Zilla Saink Nizamabad Nizamabad District .....RESPONDENTS 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 calling for records pertaining to Rc No.16/Fathernagar/2008 dt.21-05-2008 on the ﬁle of 2nd respondent and consequential proceedings if any set aside the same as been violative of Provisions of AP-Co-operative Societies Act 1964 and violative principles of Natural justice and consequently restrain the Respondents from interfering with the day to day aﬀairs of the Society in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & NEERAJA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner is a society comprising of Ex- Servicemen. The Sub-Divisional Cooperative Oﬃcer, Nizamabad, the second respondent herein, issued a notice, dated 21.05.2008, requiring the petitioner to submit certain records, on 30.05.2008. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the notice. It is urged that the notice is not referable to any speciﬁc provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’) and that the eﬀort was only to discord the existing management of the society. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent. There would have been an occasion for this Court to examine the validity and legality of the impugned notice, had it been a case where no further developments have taken place. In the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled by the fourth respondent, it is mentioned that in exercise of his powers under Section 32(1) of the Act, the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nizamabad, the ﬁrst respondent herein, had issued proceedings, dated 26.06.2008, declaring that the Managing Committee of the society ceased to hold the oﬃce and appointing persons-in-charge. A copy of the said proceedings also enclosed. In view of this development, the impugned notice virtually loses its signiﬁcance. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the proceedings, dated 26.06.2008, it has to avail its remedy before the appellate forum or this Court. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue its remedies vis-à-vis the proceedings, dated 26.06.2008. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:13.10.2008. kdl