Disposed

Sri Bhavanarishi Coop. House Building Societys Plot Owners and Residents Welfare Association v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Dec 2021WP/33905/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition regarding voter list preparation under Telangana Co-operative Societies Rules. Court directed respondent officers to consider petitioner's representation while verifying individual member authorizations, similar to a previous related order.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri Bhavanarishi Coop. House Building Societys Plot… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD ,^{(SpecialOriginal Jurisdiction)}

¶2

TUESDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 33905 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

sri Fhavanarishi coop. House Building society's plot owners and Residents wertare Association,.(Regd.No 764.1 .i4), 1.-B-s2lcli, srirama comptex, chikkadpalty, Hyderabad represented by its President, Musham Venkatesham

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

State of Telangana, represented by its principal Secretary, Department of Cooperation at Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

The Registrar cum commissioner of cooperative societies, state of relangana At Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad

¶12

The State Cooperative Election Authority, State of Telangana, Hyderabad

¶13

The District cooperative officer, Medchal at Keesara, Medchal Malkajgiri District

¶14

The Asst. Registrar, Keesara Circle, Medchal Malkajgiri District

¶15

Sri Bhavana Rishi cooperative. House. Building society Limited, represented by Its Secretary at Dammaiguda, Hyderabad

¶16

,..RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 oI the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or writs, order or Direction, declaring the action of Respondent No.3 to 6 in not following the mandatory provisions of the Telangana cooperative Societies Act and Rules made the reunder, more padicularly Rule 22 of lhe Telangana cooperative societies Rules in preparation of Voters List of the 6th Respondent Society, as illegal and arbitrary by consequently directing the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to conduct impartial, free and fair elections to the Managing Committee of the 6th Respondent Society, only after preparing/fina lizing the Voters List by including all the eligible members of the Society including the members of petitioner herein as Voters, by stricfly following the mandatory procedure envisaged under T.C.S. Act and Rules made thereunder Award costs

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶19

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 to issue interim directions to the Respondent No.3 not to issue Election Notification and not

¶20

to conduct elections to the 6th Respondent society till a valid Final Voters List is legally prepared, approvdd and certified by following the mandatory procedure contemplated under T.C.S. Act and Rules made, particularly Rule 22 of the Telangana state cooperative societies Act and Rules, by including all the eligible voters in the Voters L.ist, including the members of petitioner herein, pending disposal ofW P No. of 2021

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. N SRIDHAR REDDY

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents No 1 to 5: Gp FOR COOPERATION

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No 6:SRl R.HEMENDRANATH REDDy, LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR SRI Y PRABHURAJ

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.3390s of 2021

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of respondent Nos.3 to 6 in not following the mandatory^provislons of the Telangana Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, and Rules made thereunder, in particular Rule 22 of the Telangana Co-operative Societies Rules,¹⁹⁶⁴ (for short,'the Rules'), in preparation of voters list of the 6th respondent^- society, as illegal and arbltrary.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the^{petitioner; learnedGovernment} Pleader for Co-operative Societies, appearing^{for respondent Nos.1 t0 5;} and Sri R.Hemendranath Reddy,^{learned Senior Counsel,appearing for} Sri Y.Prabhuraj,^{learned counsel appearingfor the 6th respondent} society, and wlth their consent,^{the WritPetition itself is takenup for} hearing and disposal, at the stage^{of admission.}

¶30

The^petitioner contends that,^{in similar circumstances,this Court,} vide order, dated 10.12.2021,^{while disposlng of W.P.N0.33252 of 2021,} directed the 5th respondent^{to considerby himself the objections of the} petitioners to the voters list^prepared by the 6th^{respondent- society,in} terms of the^provisions of^{Rule 22 of the Rules, and take a decision} thereon before finalizing^{the same; and that the petitioner is alsosimilarly} placed, as it is espousing the cause on behalf^{of its membersand had} submitted a^{representation,dated29.t|.2021, with regard to the} finalizing of voters^{list and seeksfor simllar reliefof direction being given} to the 5th respondent.

¶31

¶32

Sri R,Hemendranath Reddy, learned Senior Counsel,^{per contra,} would contend that the^petitioner, being a society, cannot espouse^the cause of individual members, and it is for the individual members to approach this Court, as was done in W.P.No.33252 of 2021; and that the petitioner - society, cannot by itself take up the cause on behalf of its members, without there being any authorization to that effect by the members.

¶33

The learned Senior Counsel would also dispute the affixing of signatures of 25 members in a separate sheet and attaching the sheet to the representation, dated 29.Lt.2021, submitted to the 4th respondent; and that, by the said representation, the petitioner is only seeking the authority to restore the membership of all the members, whose names were deleted, without the individual members coming forward with their grievance, if any.

¶34

I have taken note of the contentions urged by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties.

¶35

As noted above, this Court, by order, dated 10,12..2021, passed in W.P.N0.33252 of 202L, directed the 5th respondent theretn to consider the objections by himself and not rely on the voters list prepared and submitted by the 6th respondent - society. Even in the facts of the present case, since the petitioner claims to be an association formed by the members of the 6th respondent - society and have submitted representation, dated 29,11.2021, to the 4th and 5th respondents, the 4th and 5th respondents shall consider the said representation submitted by also considering as to whether any authorization is issued by each of the-ni€lnbers for making the above representation by the society on their

¶36

¶37

behalf, prior to firing or the said representation/ encrosing therewith such authorization and also verify as to whether the 25 members, who have affixed their signatures on a separate sheet, forms part oF the representation given on 29.11.2021 and consider the objections of the said persons similarly as stated in the order dated 10.12.2021, passed in W.P.No.33252 ot 202t.

¶38