A perusal of the impugned proceedings shows that on 16.11.2010, the Fisheries Development Officer, Tenali, was appointed as person incharge. If a new managing committee was elected on 10.11.2010, the petitioner ought to have communicated the same to the respondent to obviate appointment of such person incharge. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that the purported resolution dated 10.11.2010 through which new managing committee was allegedly elected unanimously was communicated to the respondent at any point of time. At any rate, by the very nature of the pleadings, it is evident that the very claim of the petitioner that a new managing committee was elected falls in the realm of a pure fact, which needs to be adjudicated with reference to the evidence. Under Section 77 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’), the Registrar or the Government as the case may be is empowered to entertain a revision to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of any decision made or order passed by the subordinate authority under the provisions of the Act. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the issues raised by the petitioner in this writ petition, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can be appropriately decided by the revisional authority.
