Telangana High Court
WP/28066/2008 of Smt. Kattula Navamani Vs The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies on 24 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 28066 of 2008 Between: Smt. Kattula Navamani W/o. Ram Das R/o. Konteru, Yelamanchili
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION NO : 28066 of 2008
Between:
Smt. Kattula Navamani W/o. Ram DasR/o. Konteru, Yelamanchili Mandal,West Godavari District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies BhimavaramWest Godavari District.
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamusdeclaring the Proceedings No. 1130/08-B, dt.26-11-2008 of the respondent asillegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently setaside the same.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.POLISETTY RADHA KRISHNA
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION
The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R:
This writ petition is filed against the order passed by the respondent dated 26-11-2008 under Section 24(1)(b) of the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short‘the Act’), thereby disqualifying the petitioner as a member of the ManagingCommittee of the Society.
Though various contentions have been raised by the petitioner challenging theimpugned order, since an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal is available underSection 76 of the Act, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to thepetitioner to work out the remedy of appeal as provided under the Act.
However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, thereshall be a direction to the respondent that the impugned proceedings dated 26-11-2008 shall not be given effect to for a period of 10 days from today, if it is not alreadyimplemented.
______________
G. ROHINI,J
Date: 24-12-2008
Note: C.C. by tomorrow.
B/oKLP