IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No: 26269 of 2008 Between: Chillakur Sudheer Reddy S/o. Radhakrishna Reddy Nellore District Milk Producers Mutual Aided Co.op. Samity Ltd., Nellore, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District, R/o.23/1492, Lecturers Colony, Magunta Layout, Dargamitta, Nellore, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Nellore District Milk Producers Mutual Aided Co.op. Union Limited, Nellore, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District rep. by its Chairman, Mupavarapu Gopalakrishna Chowdry. 2 The Nellore District Milk Producers Mutual Aided Co.op. Union Limited, Nellore, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District rep. by its Managing Director Concern. .....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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondent in electing a new Director in place of the petitioner for the Nellore District Milk Producers Mutually Aided Co operative Union Ltd., Nellore, Nellore District, by way of proposed co option which is scheduled on 02.12.2008 that to pending arbitration proceeding before Arbitration Committee amounts to erroneous, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India besides being the provisions contempalted under A.P.Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act 1955 and rules made there under besides being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently stay the co option proposal scheduled fixed on 2.12.2008 or any other subsequent dates by allowing the writ petition and to pass necessary order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.C.KRISHNAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : ORDER: Sri T.C.Krishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that since the Arbitration Committee had granted him stay on 01-12-2008, the cause in the writ petition does not necessitate adjudication. The learned counsel would seek permission to with draw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Court in case the petitioner is aggrieved by any order which may be passed later by the Arbitration Committee. Granting the liberty sought, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 3rd December 2008 CVRK