IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.4562 of 2009 Between: Nimmala Manikyala Rao, S/o. Venkata Ratnam, Adavikolanu, Nidamarru Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Divisional Cooperative Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District 2 Adavikolanu Large Size Cooperative Society, Adavikolanu, Nidamarru Mandal, West Godavari District, Rep by its Secretary. 3 A.P. Co-operative Tribunal, Vijayawada, Krishna District, Rep by its Registrar. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not granting stay of operation of the order dt.31-10-2008 passed by the 1st respondent under Sec. 60 of the AP Co-operative Societies Act and also the consequential notice dated 27- 01-2009 issued in Form No. 6 of the Rules by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and consequentially quash the notice dt. 27-01-2009 of the 1st respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.V.RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.4562 of 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation. The main grievance of the petitioner is that questioning the order dated 31.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent- Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Eluru, West Godavari District, under Section 60 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’), he preferred an appeal, being O.A.No.7 of 2009, before the 3rd respondent- A.P. Cooperative Tribunal, Vijayawada, along with a petition, seeking stay of the order dated 31.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent, but no orders have been passed on the said stay petition till date and, on the other hand, the 1st respondent issued a notice dated 27.01.2009 in Form No.6 for attachment of immovable properties of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to dispose of the stay petition filed along with the appeal preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 31.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 5th March, 2009. Note:- Issue operative portion of the order by wire at party’s costs. B/O IBL