B NARASIMHDU Vs. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents 5 to 16 inWP.No.21612 of 1994 are the appellants herein. They filed the present appeal assailing the Judgment in W.P.No.21612 of l994 dated: 14-8-1995.

(2.) The facts of the case are that: respondent No.5 herein was a member of the Kousatya Cooperative Housing Society;respondent No.6 was a member of the L.I.C. Employees Cooperative Housing Society and respondent No. 7 was a member of the Kalyannagar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Hyderabad. Subsequently, the respondents 5 to 7, suppressing the fact that they were already members of other Cooperative Society, have availed the services of the Aypdhyanagar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Hyderabad (for short ''the Society''). They were also elected as President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Society in the elections held on 16-8-1992. Subsequently, the 1st respondent here in viz., the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Housing), Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, issued as how-cause notice dated: 15-2-1993 to the respondents 5 to 7 under Section 21(3) and 21AA of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short "the Act") directing them to submit their explanations within fifteen days. Challenging the said show-cause notice the respondents 5 to7 have filedW.P.Nos.2185/93;4186/93 and 4198/93 respectively. The three writ petitions were dismissed by this Court by a common order dated: 29-10-1993. Against the said common order, respondent No.5 filed W. A.No.3161/93 and respondent No.6 filed W.A.NO. 1362/93 respectively and both these writ appeals were dismissed by this court on 29-ll-1993.The respondent No.7did not file any writ appeal challenging order passed in W.P.No.4198/93 dated: 29-10-1993. After dismissal of the writ appeals, the 1st respondent passed the order dated 30-l l-1994 dis-qualifying respondents 5 to 7 as the Members of the Society.

(3.) Assailing theorder of the 1st respondent in Proceedings RC.No.3423/92-B dated: 30- 10-1993, respondent No.5 filed W.P.No.l7154/ 93 and respondent No.6 filed W.P.No.l7065/ 93, alleging that the impugned orders were passed without affording an opportunity to them for filing their explanation. The learned single Judge allowed these writ petitions on 12-11-1993 and 11-11-1993 respectively, and directed the 1st respondent to consider the explanations submitted by respondents 5 and 6 and to pass appropriate orders thereon.