IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 2969 of 2008 Between: Yelamarthi Satyam S/o.Venkatanarayana Nunekotla Sandu, Rajahmundry. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Divisional Coop. Oficer-cum-Dy. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Rajahmundry. 2 The Secretary, Inneespeta Coop. Bank Rajahmundry. 3 The Sale Officer, Inneespeta Coop. Bank Rajahmundry. 4 Yelamarthy Venkata Narayana Murthy S/o.late Satyam Nune Kotla Sandu, Rajahmundry. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate writ order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in disposing of the claim petition sent by the petitioner herein on 30.1.2008 under register post with Ack. Due which was received by the 1st respondent on 31.1.2008 and direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the clam petition along with stay petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 61 & Rule 52 (14) (i) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and to dispose of the claim petition as expeditiously as possible and further direct the 3rd respondent not to confirm the sale proceedings in CEP No.174/2006 of the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the claim petition before him. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.S.R.SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not disposing of the petitioner’s claim petition, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose of it along with the stay petition filed by him and further direct the 3rd respondent not to confirm the sale proceedings conducted by the 2nd respondent on 21.2.2008. This Court, on 14.2.2008, while ordering Notice Before Admission directed the respondents not to confirm the sale proceedings in favour of the third-party/auction purchaser. On instructions, the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation has stated that the claim petition filed by the petitioner was rejected on 18.2.2008, against which, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 76 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1996 before the appellate authority. In view of the same, this Court is of the opinion that no orders need to be passed in this writ petition, and accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, as the appeal is pending, and this Court directed the authorities not to confirm the sale proceedings, the interim direction shall continue for a period of two weeks from today. Meanwhile, the petitioner shall file an application before the appellate authority seeking suspension of the order dated 18.2.2008 and the appellate authority may consider the application and pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent. No costs. _______________ 24.03.2008 bcj