IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9434 of 2009 Between: V.Venkata Ramana ..... PETITIONER AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. By its District Cooperative Officer and others ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.L.V.S.NAGARAJU Counsel for the Respondents: --- The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in issuing summons dated 24-04-2009 under Section 55(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short “the Act”), whereby the petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No.4, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner was the Secretary of Nakkapalli Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited, Nakkapalli Village and Mandal, Visakhapatnam District-respondent No.3. He retired from service on 30-04-2008. An enquiry under Section 51 of the Act, into the affairs of respondent No.3-Society, was initiated and in that connection, respondent No.4 summoned the petitioner by the impugned notice. At the hearing, Sri L.V.S.Nagaraju, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that as the petitioner retired from service, respondent No.4 is not vested with the power to summon him. Section 55(2)(a) of the Act reads as under- “(2) The Registrar or any person authorized by him to exercise any powers under this Act,- (a) may summon any person who, he has reason to believe has knowledge of any of the affairs of the Society to appear before him at any place at the headquarters of the Society or any branch thereof or at any other place specified by the Registrar, and may examine that person on oath. From the above reproduced provision, it is clear that respondent No.4 is empowered to summon any person, who, he has reason to believe has knowledge of any of the affairs of the Society to appear before him for the purpose of examining him on oath. In the context of exercise of this power, whether the person so summoned is in service or has already retired has no relevance at all. As admittedly the petitioner was the Secretary of respondent No.3-Society, in respect of which enquiry under Section 51 of the Act has been initiated, he cannot plead and indeed it is not even the plea of the petitioner, that he has no knowledge of the affairs of the Society. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the impugned notice. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP No.12321 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 1st May, 2009 vrn