Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/17790/2026 of KOTAGIRI RADHA KRISHNA RAO Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 2 July 2026
for orders : Date of pronouncement : 03 Date of uploading : 06 APHC010332192026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 17790/2026 Between: 1. KOTAGIRI RADHA KRISHNA RAO, @ RADHA KRISHNA
Date of reserved for orders :
Date of pronouncement : 0
Date of uploading : 0
APHC010332192026
IN THE H
(
FRIDAY
THE HONOURABLE
WRIT
Between:
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.
1. KOTAGIRI RADHA K S/O. LATE KOTAGIR OCC BUSINESS, KAMAVARAPUKOTA GODAVARI DISTRICT
1. THE STATE OF AN SECRETARY, AGRIC SECRETARIAT, AMA
2. THE DISTRICT CO GODAVARI DISTRICT
3. THE SURCHARGE COOPERATIVE SOC DISTRICT, A.P.-53400
4. M/S KAMAVARAPUK SOCIETY, (LSCS) H-8 (C.E.O.,), KAMAVA ELURU/WEST GODA ---- 03-07-2026 06-07-2026 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Y, THE 3rd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT E SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDA T PETITION NO: 17790/2026 KRISHNA RAO, @ RADHA KRISHNA K RI M.D.K. GANDHI, AGED ABOUT 5
R/O.H.NO.3-13, RAMALAYAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, ELU T, ANDHRA PRADESH.-534449 ...PE AND NDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS P CULTURE AND CO-OPERATION DEPA RAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 522237 OOPERATIVE OFFICER DCO, ELU T, ANDHRA PRADESH.-534001 E OFFICER/DEPUTY REGISTRA CIETIES, NIZVID, ELURU/WEST G
KOTA LARGE SIZED COOPERATIVE 878, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE ARAPUKOTA VILLAGE AND AVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.-
AVA KISHORE, 5 YEARS, CENTER, RU/WEST TITIONER PRINCIPAL ARTMENT,
URU/WEST AR OF GODAVARI E CREDIT OFFICER, MANDAL, -534449
...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issuance of an appropriate Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the Respondent No.3, in rejecting the recall petitions, filed seeking to recall of Assistant Registrar/Section 51 Inquiry officer and Ex-Chairperson of 4th Respondent for further cross-examination vide Rc.No.857/2022/C/SN-1 and 6, dated 27.06.2026 respectively and also not providing Documents and Information even after making request letter dated 22.05.2026 under Right to Information Act., 2005, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005 and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and Rules made therein and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in Rc.No.857/2022/C/SN-1&6 in respect of Petitioner herein, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BOBBA VIJAYALAKSHMI
2. SRINIVAS BASAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COOPERATION
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 17790/2026 The Court made the following Order:
Heard Sri Srinivas Basava, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Cooperation appearing for the respondents.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition is against the impugned proceedings of the respondent No.3 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner seeking to recall and reexamine the Assistant Registrar/Section 51 the Inquiry Officer and the Ex-Chairperson of the respondent No.4 - Cooperative Society.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the inquiry proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for Short ‘the Act’) are governed by the procedure under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the CPC’). Thus the applicant should have been given all the reasonable opportunities to recall the witnesses and reexamine them. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decisions of rendered by the erstwhile composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of K. Kanaka Rao Vs. Chairman, A.P. Coopertive Tribunal, Hyderabad and other1, Mohd.
1 2011 (6) ALD 340
Saqawath Ali Bakshi Vs. Shaik Mohd. Iqbal2, prays for interim stay of all further proceedings in Rc.No.857/2022/C/SN-1&6 pending before the 3rd respondent as the case is fixed for hearing on 04-07-2026.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Cooperation raised an objection as to the maintainability of the Writ Petition having regard to the provisions of Section 77 of the Act, wherein a remedy of Revision is provided before the Registrar against any order(s) passed by the officer(s) Subordinate to the Registrars not being the one passed under Section 76 of the Act. Having regard to the same, it is argued that the Writ Petition is not maintainable and thus prays for dismissal of the Writ Petition.
6. Considered the submissions.
7. Having regard to the provisions of the Section 77 of the Act, this Court is of the view that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies is the appropriate authority to call for and examine the record of any officer Subordinate to him in respect of any order/proceeding, not being a proceeding in respect of which an appeal under Section 76(1) of the Act is provided to the Tribunal and if it appears to the Registrar that the said order should be modified annulled reversed, remitted he may pass orders accordingly.
8. In the light of the said provision, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Registrar, against the order impugned in the writ petition, within a period of 2 2011 (6) ALD 346
two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Till the Registrar takes up the application filed by the petitioner, the impugned proceedings of the respondent No.3 are kept under abeyance.
9. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 03-07-2026
Note: Issue CC by 06-07-2026
B/o
MSI
Whether the order is: Speaking ☑ Reasoned
Reportable
Non-reportable ☑
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO: 17790/2026
Dated: 03-07-2026
Note: Issue CC by 06-07-2026
B/o
MSI