M VENKATA REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Subject matter of these two writ petitions relates to the post of President to Andhra Pradesh Pharmacy Council (in short, the Council) and action of the Government in appointing Project Director, A.P.State Aids Control Society, Hyderabad to take charge of affairs of the Council. The petitioners in both the writ petitions claim to have been duly elected as President of the Council respectively. It is contention of the petitioner in W.P. No.1726 of 2011 that he was elected as President of the Council in the elections conducted on 12.10.2009. It is contention of the petitioner in W.P. No.27438 of 2011 that he was elected as President of the Council in the meeting held on 31.03.2011. Writ Petition No.1726 of 2011 was filed on 31.01.2011 seeking mandamus declaring the special meeting notice dated 28.01.2011 to conduct elections of President and Vice President on 31.01.2011 at 2.00 P.M as arbitrary, illegal etc., and consequently for direction to the respondents therein not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful functioning as President of the Council. Writ Petition No.27438 of 2011 is filed on 29.09.2011 seeking mandamus declaring action of the 1st respondent/Government in directing the 2nd respondent/Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society to take charge of affairs of the Council as illegal, arbitrary etc., and to drop all further proceedings. At the outset it may be seen that much water had flown under the bridge after filing of Writ Petition No.1726 of 2011 in this Court. It is contention of the Government in the counter that the petitioner viz., M.Venkata Reddy resigned from the post of President of the Council by tendering resignation letter on 28.03.2011. Subsequently the petitioner in W.P. No.27438 of 2011 viz., Annapareddy Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy claims to have been elected as President of the Council in the elections held on 31.03.2011. Thereafter on 26.09.2011 the Special Chief Secretary to Government, Health, Medical & Family Welfare Department, Hyderabad addressed letter to the Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society, Hyderabad to be in-charge of the Council duly giving cheque power (i.e., counter signing) along with the Registrar of the council with immediate effect. Inspite of it, the petitioner/M.Venkata Reddy did not question election dated 31.03.2011 said to have been conducted for the post of president of the Council in which the other petitioner Annapareddy Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy claims to have been elected as President; and also did not question the letter dated 26.09.2011 of the Government appointing Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society as in-charge of A.P. Pharmacy Council with cheque power, by making necessary amendments to the prayer in W.P. No.1726 of 2011 and by impleading further parties to that writ petition. Instead, W.P.M.P.No.5777 of 2012 is filed by the petitioner in W.P. No.1726 of 2011 for amendment of prayer in the writ petition by including additional prayer that elected body of the council was not abolished and to permit the petitioner to continue as President of the council. Now, it is sought to be contended by the petitioner's counsel in W.P. No.1726 of 2011 as well as Additional Advocate General who appeared for the Government that the petitioner/M.Venkata Reddy gave another letter disputing his signature in the resignation letter dated 28.03.2011 and that there is dispute about resignation of the petitioner as President of the Council. The said submission made by the Additional Advocate General during the course of arguments is contrary to the stand of the Government in the counter affidavit filed in that writ petition. There is no material on record to show that the petitioner/ M.Venkata Reddy addressed any letter disputing his resignation letter dated 28.03.2011; and the Government did not file copy of the said letter in this Court along with any sworn affidavit/counter affidavit. The petitioner filed copy of the said letter dated 20.07.2011 addressed by him to the Government stating that he had not tendered any resignation to the membership of the Council and that in case any forged resignation letter on his name was received, it may be ignored. Copy of the said letter is filed along with W.P.M.P. No.5777 of 2012 by the petitioner on 21.02.2012. In the affidavit filed in support of W.P.M.P No.5777 of 2012, the petitioner contends that he did not resign for the post of member and President of the Council and that letters produced are forged and fabricated for the purpose of this litigation. If the said letter, dated 20.07.2011, addressed by the petitioner was with the Government, the Government would not have failed to disclose the same in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent on 27.08.2011. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent though does not contain date of swearing of the said counter affidavit, contains verification statement, dated 18.08.2011. It is contended that the letter, dated 20.07.2011, of the petitioner was ante-dated and was inserted in the record subsequently. The Government/1st respondent did not choose to file any additional counter affidavit disclosing receipt of the said letter, dated 20.07.2011, and date of receipt of the same. At any rate, resignation of the petitioner/Venkat Reddy for the post of President as well as Membership of the Council becomes a disputed question of fact, which cannot be gone into and decided in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Since he did not question the subsequent election to the post of President on 31.03.2011 and also appointing person in-charge of the Council on 26.09.2011, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in W.P.No.1726 of 2011, as it has become infructuous. Also, the petitioner is not entitled for the proposed amendment sought in WPMP. No.5777 of 2012 in that writ petition.

(2.) Insofar as the petitioner/Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy in W.P.No.27438 of 2011 is concerned, apart from claiming himself as duly elected President to the Council in the elections held on 31.03.2011, questions the Governmental action in directing the 2nd respondent/Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society, to take charge of affairs of the Council on the ground that the said direction dislodges duly elected body of the Council without giving any notice. The impugned letter, dated 26.09.2011, of the 1st respondent gives brief immediate past history of the events, which culminated into appointment of the 2nd respondent as in-charge of the Council. On 02.12.2009, by G.O.Rt. No.1547, one R.V. Chandravadan, who was the then Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society, was appointed as Returning Officer to conduct elections to the Council under Section 19(a) of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 (in short, "the Act") and he was given cheque power to run the day-to-day administration, as there was no President to the Council. After conducting elections under Section 19(a) of the Act, election of 6 members to the Council was notified by G.O.Ms.No.8, dated 10.01.2011. By Memo No.17716/L.2/2010, dated 28.01.2011, R.V.Chandravadan/Project Director was appointed to convene the Council and to conduct elections of President and Vice-President as per powers laid down under Rule 140 of the A.P. Pharmacy Council Rules, 1955 (in short, "the Rules"), Thereupon, M. Venkat Reddy filed W.P.No.1726 of 2011 in this Court and obtained interim stay of election to the President of the Council proposed to be held pursuant to the special meeting notice, dated 28.01.2011, convening of Council meeting to conduct election of President and Vice-President on 31.01.2011 or on any date thereafter, pending disposal of the said writ petition. This Court passed the said interim stay order on 31.01.2011. While so, on the same day i.e., on 31.03.2011, the Government also passed suo motu stay of the elections to the post of President of the Council. In view of the said stay orders granted by this Court as well as by the Government, the proposed election for President of the Council did not take place on 31.01.2011.

(3.) After transfer of R.V. Chandravadan from the post of Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society, C. Parthasarathy was posted as Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society. By the impugned letter, dated 26.09.2011, the Government appointed C. Parthasarathy, Project Director, A.P. State Aids Control Society, as in-charge of the Council duly giving cheque power along with the Registrar of the Council. It is contended by the Additional Advocate General that the impugned letter substitutes another officer in the place of transferred officer and that the Government did nothing more thereunder. But, the Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner/Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy contends that by the impugned letter, the Government wanted to substitute the 2nd respondent as person in-charge of the Council in the place of elected President, who is the petitioner. The impugned letter, dated 26.09.2011, did not say so explicitly. But, the said letter contains a reference to the alleged election of the petitioner/Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy as President. In the letter it is stated that inspite of the Government stayed process of election, it came to the notice of the Government that elections to the post of President and Vice-President of the Council were conducted without notice to the Government and A. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy was elected as President of the Council, which is highly irregular. In that letter, the 1st respondent requested the 2nd respondent to conduct thorough enquiry and submit report to the Government for taking appropriate action against such committee as per the Act and the Rules. The Government also enclosed petitions/ complaints received in this regard to the 2nd respondent for finalizing the enquiry in this regard.