IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.4799 of 2005 Date: 27th October, 2010 Between: T.Sheshaiah and another. .. Petitioners And Sompet P.A.C.S. rep. by its Person-in-Charge/Chairman, Sompet, Srikakulam district & others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.4799 of 2005 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in issuing surcharge proceedings after remitting the amount by the petitioners as directed by second respondent and again on the very same allegations, directing the first respondent to lodge a against the petitioners for the very same offence in Crime No.11/2005 dated 7.2.2005 filed under Section 403 IPC and Section 79(1)(F) of A.P.C. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 as arbitrary and illegal. It appears, first petitioner worked as Paid Secretary of Sompeta PACS and second petitioner was the Ex- Person-in-Charge/Chairman (President) of PACS, Sompeta, Srikakulam district. While that being so, first petitioner was proceeded with departmentally on the ground that he had committed certain irregularities in depositing the amounts during his tenure. He was issued with a charge sheet and after conducting a detailed enquiry into the charges, respondents have dropped proceedings while accepting the explanation offered by the petitioner and directed him to deposit an amount of Rs.308/- and Rs.1,012/-. Accordingly, he had deposited the amounts including the interest thereon. However, it appears, for the very same charge, another charge memo dated 29.11.2003 was issued and the petitioner submitted his explanation on 10.12.2003. After satisfying the said explanation, the present Person-in-Charge dropped further proceedings. Now the grievance of the petitioners is that while position is this way, in the meanwhile respondents have ordered for criminal prosecution under Section 79(1)(F) of A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 against the petitioners. According to the petitioners, in the first enquiry itself, charges were dropped after considering the explanation submitted by them and that they have also deposited the amounts as directed. However, a second enquiry was also conducted for the very same charges and the Person-in-Charge endorsed that the charges may be dropped in view of satisfactory explanation offered by the petitioners. But in the meanwhile, respondents have ordered for criminal prosecution against the petitioners under Section 79(1)(F) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act. This position is not in dispute and why criminal prosecution was launched against the petitioners is not forthcoming. No counter is filed by the respondents. This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 25.4.2005, directed the third respondent not to take further steps including arrest of the petitioners in Crime No.11/2005 on the file of P.S. Sompeta, Srikakulam district. The said order was made absolute on 20.6.2008. I am of the considered opinion that once the charges are dropped and the petitioners were directed to pay the amounts, the question of launching criminal prosecution under Section 79(1)(F) of A.P.C.S. Act does not arise. Therefore, the criminal prosecution launched against the petitioners is hereby set aside. In the result, the F.I.R.No.11 of 2005 dated 7.2.2005 on the file of P.S. Sompeta also stands quashed. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 27.10.2010 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.4799 of 2005 27.10.2010