qAPHC010425242024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 21990/2024 Between: Karri Nageswara Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. L V S NAGARAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR AGRICULTURE 2. V SUBRAHMANYAM 2 The court made the following order: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:- “…pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 5th respondent in addressing a letter in Rc.No.H(1) 17/2017 dated 25-07-02024 to the 2nd respondent for appointment of Committee without conducting elections to the 7th and 8th respondent societies forthwith and also for delegating the functional Registrar Powers to the District Cooperative Officer to administrate the societies on par with the PACS by amending the existing G.O.Ms.No.50 agriculture and cooperation Department dated 23-02-1994 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act and Rules made there under and consequently direct the respondents to continue the existing Managing Committees to run the affairs of the 7th and 8th respondent societies so as to get the work orders extension from 9th respondent and to pass such other order or orders.…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The issue raised in the writ petition is that, inspite of the petitioners society term ending on 09.05.2024 and 16.11.2024 respectively, the respondent authorities i.e., the Horticulture department or PACS have either conducted elections or appointed any person in-charge (PIC), as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act. As a result of the 3 respondents failure to conduct the elections to the society, the steel plant has not provided any work and therefore, prayed to direct the respondent authorities to conduct the elections to the society. 4. This Court by an order dated 08.11.2024, directed the 9th respondent to provide work till the election conducted to the petitioners’ society or person in-charge is appointed, whichever is earlier. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 9th respondent provided the work to the petitioners. It is further stated that no additional order is required in the present writ petition. 6. Recording the above submissions, the Writ Petition is closed. If at all, the petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents, they are at liberty to file fresh writ petition on the same cause of action. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 30.01.2025 KBN 4 185 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO W.P.No.21990 OF 2024 Date: 30.01.2025 KBN