APHC010018852026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1518/2026 Between: 1. JAVVADI SRI VENKATA VASU DEVA, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO, RESIDENT OF 13-1-20, BANGARAYYA VEEDHI, RAMACHANDRA RAO PETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. PIN- 534102. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATION DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. PIN 522237. 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR COOPERATION AND REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE AT D.NO 2-16-83, SKY LARK TOWERS, 11TH LINE, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR - 522 006. 3. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED, ELURU, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, (C.E.O.), O/O. PANUGANTI VARI STREET, R.R.PET, ELURU, ELURU/WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P- 534001. 4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED, ELURU, REP. BY ITS CEO, O/O. PANUGANTI VARI STREET, R.R.PET, ELURU, ELURU/WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P - 534001. 2 VS,J W.P.No.1518 of 2026 5. THE DOMESTIC INQUIRY OFFICER, THE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED, ELURU, SMT. K. KIRANMAI, DGM, APCOB, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI, ANDHRA PRADESH -534001. 6. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT - 534001. 7. THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR/INQUIRY OFFICER, THE DISTRICT CO- OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT ELURU, A.P -534001. ...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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 2nd respondent vide File N0.AGCO6- 17026/1/2019- APCOBDCCB-CCRCS dated 29.03.2023, and issuance of subsequent charge memo vide Ref Legal/2023-24 dated 15.07.2023 by the 4th respondent, is legally invalid and abuse of process as this Hon ble Court in W.P.No. 15893 of 2023 as this Hon ble Court vide orders dated 27.03.2024 allowed the said Writ Petition by setting-aside the orders in File N0.AGCO6- 17026/1/2019-APCOBDCCB-CCRCS dated 29.03.2023 the subsequent proceedings issued is become an infructuous which does not contain any legal sanctity or validity once the orders are suspended the authorities cannot issue further proceedings which is not permissible under law and the act of the authorities are highly unsustainable and highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentlyset aside the orders passed by the 2nd Respondent in File N0.AGCO6-17026/1/20 19- APCOBDCCB-CCRCS dated 29.03.2023 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 may be pleased to stay all the further proceedings in respect of the proceedings issued by the 2nd Respondent File N0.AGCO6-17026/1/2019- APCOBDCCB-CCRCS dated 29.03.2023 as the orders are without following the due procedure as settled principals of law pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass 3 VS,J W.P.No.1518 of 2026 IA NO: 2 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 May be may be pleased to permit the petitioners to come on record in the main writ petition in WP.No.1518 of 2026 as legal heirs of the deceased first petition late Javvadi Sri Venkata Vasu Deva Suryanarayana who died on 15.01.2026 as the 2nd and 3rd petitioners , and permits them to contest the case on behalf of 1st petitioner, pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ELURU SESHA MAHESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SURAGANI VIJAYA KUMAR 2. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 4 VS,J W.P.No.1518 of 2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 2nd respondent vide File N0 AGCO6- 17026/1/2019- APCOBDCCB-CCRCS dated 29.03.2023 and issuance of subsequent charge memo vide Ref: Legal/2023-24 date 15.07.2023 by the 4th respondent, is legally invalid and abuse of process as this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.15893 of 2023 as this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 27.03.2024 allowed the said Writ Petition by setting- aside the orders in File No.AGCO6- 17026/1/2019-APCOBDCCB- CCRCS dated 29.03.2023 the subsequent proceedings issued is become an infructuous which does not contain any legal sanctity or validity once the orders are suspended the authorities cannot issue further proceedings which is not permissible under law and the act of the authorities are highly unsustainable and highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the orders passed by the 2nd Respondent in File No.AGCO6-17026/1/2019- APCOBDCCB- CCRCS dated 29.03.2023….” 2. The brief facts of the case are that while the petitioner was working as Manager at Tadepalligudem Branch, certain irregularities relating to Bank Guarantees were allegedly noticed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies (RCS). Pursuant thereto, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings dated 29.03.2023 under Section 51 of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, directing initiation of disciplinary action against the petitioner and 16 5 VS,J W.P.No.1518 of 2026 others for alleged willful negligence and dereliction of duties during the period from 2012-2013 to 2018-2019. 3. The case of the petitioner is that Section 51 of the Act empowers the Registrar either suo motu or on an application made in accordance with law, to hold an enquiry or direct an authorized person to conduct enquiry into the constitution, working and financial condition of a society. It is contended that the Managing Committee is required to place the enquiry report before the General Body within one month. According to the petitioner, without adhering to the procedure contemplated under Section 51 of the Act, the enquiry report dated 29.03.2023 was submitted and, based on the same, the 4th respondent issued charge memo dated 15.07.2023 placing the petitioner under suspension. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner initially filed W.P.No.35565 of 2025. However, the said writ petition was withdrawn on 20.12.2025 with liberty to challenge the enquiry report conducted under Section 51 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, and the charge memorandum by filing an independent writ petition. Pursuant thereto, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Suragani Vijaya Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4 and learned Government Pleader for Services-II. 6 VS,J W.P.No.1518 of 2026 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent fairly submitted that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.15893 of 2023 and batch dated 27.03.2024. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows: “Accordingly, writ petition Nos.15893, 18558, 23177 and 23264 of 2024 are allowed by setting aside the order passed against the petitioners herein by respondent No.2 vide File No.AGC06- 17026/1/2019-APCOBDCCB – CCRCS, dated 29.03.2023 and the consequential order passed by respondent No.7 vide Rc.No.9/2023/DCCB dated 21.06.2023. However, the respondents are at liberty to order fresh inquiry, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs.” 6. After considering the submissions made by both the learned counsels and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court observes that the proceedings dated 29.03.2023 issued by the 2nd respondent, which formed the basis for issuance of the impugned charge memo dated 15.07.2023, have already been set aside by this Court in the earlier batch of writ petitions. Therefore, once the main proceedings themselves have been set aside, the consequential charge memo issued by the 4th respondent cannot survive. 7. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned charge memo dated 15.07.2023 is liable to be set aside. 7 VS,J W.P.No.1518 of 2026 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the charge memo vide Ref:Legal/2023-24, dated 15.07.2023 issued by the 4th respondent. However, it is open to the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law, if so advised. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated 07.05.2026 KGR