IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1388 OF 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 28.08.2001 in w.p.No.17892 of 2001 on the file of the High Court.) Between: B.Babu Rao ..... APPELLANT AND 1. The Senior Manager, Girijan Primary Coop. Marketing Society Ltd., Utnoor, Adilabad District. 2. The Coop. Sub-Registrar/A&E, Girijan Coop. Corporation Ltd., Regional Office, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 3. The Senior Manager, Girijan Primary Coop. Corporation Ltd., Asifabad, Adilabad District. 4. The Girijan Coop. Corporation Ltd., rep. By its Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant : MR.M.SUDHIR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.K.JAISWAL The Court made the following : O R D E R (Per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Aggrieved by the order, dated 28.08.2001 made in WP No.17892 of 2001 by a learned Single Judge of this court directing the appellant herein to ﬁle a statutory appeal, as contemplated under the Cooperative Societies Act while suspending the recovery ordered against him so as to enable him to prefer statutory appeal, the present Writ Appeal is ﬁled by the petitioner in the writ petition. The appellant herein is the writ petitioner. He was appointed as Junior Assistant in the fourth respondent Corporation in the year 1970 and promoted as Senior Assistant in the year 1989. On 19.12.1995, the petitioner was transferred and posted as Senior Stores Assistant at GPCMS Limited, Asifabad, and was placed in-charge of Domestic Requirement Godowns and he was also issued with a proceeding dated 01.04.1996 entrusting with certain additional duties to be responsible for the stocks received after 01.04.1996. While so, the third respondent initiated proceedings under Section 61 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, against one G.Gurupadam, who was in-charge of the Godowns upto 31.03.1996, by way of ﬁling Arbitration claim before the second respondent, by proceedings dated 15.07.1996, with a prayer to pass an award for Rs.3,91,679.40 Ps. against the said Gurupadam and during the process of enquiry, appellant herein was examined as a witness. Subsequently, the appellant came to know that he was also held responsible jointly and severally along with the said G.Gurupadam, for an amount of Rs.3,92,953/- with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of award i.e., 11.08.1999. It is case of the appellant that copy of the award was neither served on him nor he was informed of passing of award against him and he came to know of the same when the ﬁrst respondent informed him about the recovery of Rs.3,500/- from his salary from the month of August, 2001. A learned Single Judge of this court by the order impugned in this Writ Appeal, has disposed of the writ petition while suspending the impugned award to the extent of recovery from the appellant and directing the appellant to ﬁle a statutory appeal, as contemplated under the Cooperative Societies Act. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioner preferred this Appeal inter alia contending that the question requiring decision in the writ petition was as to whether the Arbitrator – 2nd respondent has power or jurisdiction to go beyond the reference made to him under Section 61 of the Cooperative Societies Act and make the appellant liable under the award without there being any claim by the respondent Corporation against the appellant and that too without notice to him. It is case of the petitioner that in addition to his duties as Domestic Requirement Godowns, by virtue of proceedings dated 01.04.1996 issued by the third respondent, the appellant was entrusted with additional duties of Double Lock Oﬃcer to the Mandal Level Stores Godown. It is also his case that since there was deﬁcit in the stocks maintained by the then in-charge of the said Godown by name Mr.G.Gurupadam, the third respondent initiated proceedings under Section 61 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act against him in ARC No.8/96-97, in which the appellant was examined as a witness, but surprisingly, when the ﬁrst respondent informed him that a sum of Rs.3,500/- is being recovered from his salary from the month of August, 2001, he was shocked to know that the second respondent while allowing the claim, has also held him liable jointly and severally along with the said Mr.G.Gurupadam, and consequently, the second respondent directed the third respondent to withhold a sum of Rs.2,73,573.77 Ps. from the salary of the appellant. A bare perusal of the record and the impugned order makes it abundantly clear that a just decision can be arrived at only after adducing evidence. Facts and ﬁgures, as sought to be contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, cannot be adjudicated in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Whether the appellant is liable to pay the amount or not can only be adjudicated on evidence and this court, cannot relegate itself to the status of an Appellate Authority. Even assuming that the Arbitrator has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned award, as contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the opinion that the appellant can agitate the said issue before the Appellate Authority, as contemplated under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act and as directed by the learned Single Judge. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, without adverting to merits or otherwise of the lis in issue, we direct the appellant to prefer statutory appeal as contemplated under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, within a period of six weeks from today. We further direct that as and when such an Appeal is preferred by the appellant, the Appellate Authority shall dispose of the same within a period of three months thereafter, after aﬀording an opportunity to the appellant. Till such time the interim direction granted by this court on 10.9.2001 shall continue till then. With this direction, the writ appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs. ------------------------------------ JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI --------------------------------------- JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR August 27, 2008 PGS THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1388 OF 2001 (Per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) August 27, 2008