IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 15915 of 2000 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....RESPONDENT 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 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.LAKSHMANA SARMA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE The Court made the following : ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ } ORDER: The petitioners are the legal heirs of one Andhra Basava Lingam who was the President of first respondent-Dulla Handloom Weavers’ Cooperative Production and Sales Society Limited, Dulla. The writ petition is filed seeking for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for records relating to O.A.No.170 of 1994 on the file of the third respondent-A.P. Cooperative Tribunal, Vijayawada, confirming the orders of the second respondent-Regional Deputy Director, Enforcement/Regional Deputy Director of Handlooms and Textiles, Warangal. The second respondent issued proceedings under Section 60 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh State Cooperative Societies Act 7 of 1964 in R.C.No.1/89 dated 17-02-1993 fixing the liability in respect of misappropriation of funds. The Assistant Director of Handlooms and Textiles, Rajahmundry, in his proceedings Rc.No.2818/87-C dated 27-07-1987 held an enquiry with regard to the constitution, working, financial position of the Dulla Handloom Weavers Cooperative Production and Sales Society Limited No.B.429, Dulla, East Godavari District, with particular reference of misappropriation of funds and misuse of trade deposits. In that context, one Nageswararao, Development Officer, Handlooms & Textiles of the Office of the Assistant Director of Handlooms and Textiles, Rajahmundry, conduced an enquiry and submitted enquiry report. On the basis of the enquiry report, five orders were originally passed in R.C.No.17055/87-F2 dated 23-03-1988 fixing the responsibility jointly and severally on the previous Ex.President and staff of the society. The amount alleged to be misappropriated during the period from 01-10-1971 to 30-06-1987 is to a tune of Rs.25,71,525/-. Against the order dated 23-03-1988 appeals have been preferred before the learned District Munsif, Rajahmundry, as the appellate authority, under the Cooperative Societies Act in C.T.A.Nos.3/88 to 7/88. The learned District Munsif, Rajahmundry, remanded the matters. On that remand, the second respondent issued the proceedings in R.C.No.1/89 dated 17-02-1993. As far as the father of the petitioners is concerned, who was the Ex.President, is liable, is restricted to an extent of Rs.4,03,370/- with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of misappropriation of the trade deposit till the date of realization, for which the assets of Basavalingam in the hands of his legal representatives, are made liable. As against the said order, they filed O.A.No.170 of 1994 on the file of A.P. Cooperative Tribunal, Vijayawada. After considering the matter, the Tribunal in its proceedings dated 23-03-2000 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the second respondent. Aggrieved by which the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as far as the liability of the petitioners is concerned there is no dispute. The appellate Tribunal has observed in its judgment that they do not find any error or mistake committed by the learned lower authority in passing the impugned order binding the estate of the deceased in the hands of the present appellants. It is also observed that it is for the society to identify the estate which devolved on the appellants when it initiates execution proceedings and at that stage, it has to prove that those properties were the properties belonging to the deceased at his death. In view of the said observation, without disputing the validity of the order passed by the appellate authority confirming the order passed by the lower authority in substance, since the execution proceedings have not been commenced, the petitioners may be given liberty to make an appropriate application for identification of the property over which the petitioners made their claim in the execution proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondents having been filed counter submits that the properties have already been identified, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. The observation made by the learned appellate Tribunal reveals that the EP proceedings have not been commenced. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that EP Proceedings have not been commenced and the counter filed by the respondent does not reveal the properties over which the father of the petitioner had exclusive right therein. Therefore, having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondent Government and in view of the observation made by the appellate authority in the impugned order, no orders need be passed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to make an appropriate application in the execution proceedings to be initiated for identification of the properties claimed by them from that of the properties exclusively belongs to their father and it is for the Execution Court to consider and pass appropriate orders therein. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ 01st December, 2008 SKM