Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2024 DAILYLAW 1872 (AP)

Sri Narina Pulleswararao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/1207/2024 · 2026-06-17

Sumathi Jagadam

body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010019462024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 1207/2024 Between: 1. SRI NARINA PULLESWARARAO,, S/O. VENKANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE LAKKAVARAM P.A.C.S., LAKKAVARAM VILLAGE, MALKIPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI/ DR.B.AMBEDKAR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE AND CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR/DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, . EAST GODAVARI/DR.B. AMBEDKAR DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE DIVISIONAL COOPERATIVE OFFICER, AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI/DR.B. AMBEDKAR DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK, EAST GODAVARI/KAKINADA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 5. THE LAKKAVARAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS CHAIR-PERSON, LAKKAVARAM VILLAGE, MALKIPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI/DR.B. AMBEDKAR DISTRICT, A.P. 2 6. SRI SAKA VENKATESHWARA RAO, S/O. S.MUSALIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O LAKKAVARAM VILLAGE ,MALKIPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI/DR.B. AMBEDKAR DISTRICT, A.P. 7. SRI A VENKATRA RAO, S/O.A.SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O LAKKAVARAM VILLAGE, MALKIPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI/DR.B. AMBEDKAR DISTRICT, A.P. ...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in issuing D.No.2222/2023-B, dated 27.12.2023 by invoking the power under Section 59 of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (here after referred as the Act,) thereby directing the 5th Respondent to suspend the petitioner, without any juridiction and further action of the 5th Respondent suspending the petitioner by resolution dated 30.12.2023 basing on the said proceedings, contrary to direction of the 3th Respondent directions, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of Section 115-D (2) of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and rules made therein, contrary to the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same as viod and without any juridiction and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to suspend the proceedings of 2nd respondent vide D.No. 2222/2023- B, dated 27-12-2023 and consequential proceedings of the 5th respondent dated 30-12-2023, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondents No.1 to 3 in the Writ 3 Petition No. 1207 of 2024 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 May be pleased to grant leave for filling the Counter affidavit by receive it to the record of W.P.No.1207 of 2024 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D V SASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G V SHIVAJI 2. GP FOR COOPERATION 3. SRINIVAS BASAVA 4 The Court made the following ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and the writ petition becomes infructuous. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 18.06.2026 rsd 5 5 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 1207/2024 Date: 18.06.2026 rsd