THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27220 of 2010 Date:08.03.2011 Between: B.Satyanandam ..... Petitioner AND The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Hyderabad and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri G. Ravi Mohan Counsel for Respondent No.1: Sri B.P. Mohan, standing counsel for APIIC Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.3 in passing orders on the purported appeal dated 03.09.2010 filed by the petitioner along with other members of respondent No.2 society as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to respondent No.3 to dispose of the said appeal. I have heard Sri G. Ravi Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.P. Mohan, learned standing counsel for respondent No.1. No one appeared for respondent Nos.2 and 3 at the hearing. The petitioner is an employee of respondent No.1 Corporation working in Jeedimetla zone and member of respondent No.2 society. He has averred that as per bye-law No.5 of respondent No.2 society, every permanent employee is its member and is eligible for allotment of a plot or a house if he does not own any plot or house. It is his further case that since inception of respondent No.2 society, no elections are conducted and respondent No.1 by his proceedings dated 29.01.2008 allotted Acs.18.00 of land situated at IDA Pysamylaram to respondent No.2 society for allotment of the same to its employees after converting the same into plots. The petitioner alleged irregularities in allotment of plots by the self-claimed Directors of respondent No.2 society. To ensure that respondent No.2 society is run by properly elected managing committee, the workers and employees union of respondent No.1 Corporation made representations to respondent Nos.1 and 2. The petitioner further averred that under Section 23(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995 an adhoc committee has to be constituted by the general body of the society and that the petitioner along with 25 members of respondent No.2 society filed an appeal before respondent No.3 on 03.09.2010 which was numbered as appeal No.20427 of 2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far respondent No.3 has not disposed of the same. No counter-affidavits have been filed by any of the respondents. As the grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is confined to non-disposal of the so called appeal by respondent No.3, it is not necessary for this Court to deal with the various averments made by the petitioner with respect to the management of respondent No.2 society and the alleged illegalities in allotment of plots to its employees. Respondent No.3 is, therefore, directed to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal/representation, if not already done and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.34768 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 08th March, 2011 GHN