( 1 ) HEARD - Sri E. Manohar, Sri J. V. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocates, sri D. V. Bhadram, Sri K. V. Satyanarayana, sri Badri Premnath, Advocates for the several petitioners/appellants; learned Advocate general for the State of Andhra Pradesh; sri Nooti Ram Mohan Rao, Sri Ashok Anand kumar, Sri K. Gopaia Krishna Murthy, advocates for the several Co-operative Banks and Sri M. Ratna Reddy. Advocate for the union of India.

( 2 ) THE several writ petitions were filed at various stages of proceedings before the authorities of the Registration Department of the State. All the writ petitioners had obtained loans or Overdraft facility from the respective co-operative Banks in sums exceeding rupees ten lakhs each. In every instance there was a default in the repayment of the instalments or the loan amount and consequently a violation of the terms of the loan agreement. The lending Co-operative banks had initiated proceedings for recovery of the dues underthe provisions of the Andhra pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 [ap Act 7/64] (for short the 1964 Act ). In some cases awards were passed u/sec. 61 or certificates issued u/sec. 71 of the 1964 act. In some of the cases the recovery claims of the Co-operative Banks were pending adjudication and in some instances execution proceedings pursuant to the awards passed were being processed. At this stage writ petitions were filed either in the nature of prohibition or Certiorari as the case may be, assailing the jurisdiction of the authorities under the 1964 Act, to either adjudicate upon the claims of the Co-operative Banks, assailing the awards passed, certificates issued orthe execution proceedings initiated. The challenge is that the claims of the respective co-operative banks for recovery of the debts due to them could be adjudicated exclusively by the Tribunals constituted under the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 [central Act 51/93] (for short the 1993 Act ) and the jurisdiction of the authorities under the 1964 Act is eclipsed and overborne by the provisions of the 1993 Act.

( 3 ) IT requires to be noticed that the provisions of the 1964 Act have not been challenged nor any relief sought for their invalidation, in any of these writ petitions; except that in W. P. No. 5605 of 2000 the provisions of Sec. 71 of the 1964 Act are challenged.

( 4 ) ON behalf of the State Government and the respondent Co-operative banks it is asserted that the provisions of the 1993 Act have no application and the Tribunals constituted under this Act have no jurisdiction, power or authority to entertain and decide applications from co-operative banks for recovery of debts due to them and therefore the various claim proceedings pending, awards passed, certificates issued or execution proceedings initiated under the provisions of the 1964 Act are competent, valid and operative.

( 5 ) INTERPRETATION of the provisions of statutes of the Union of India, including the 1993 Act and The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [central Act 10/49] (for short the 1949 act), fall for consideration. As competing claims as to the vitality of the Union and State legislations fall for determination in these writ petitions, notice was issued to the Union of india in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Banking Division ). Sri M. Ratna Reddy, learned counsel representing the Central Government, on instructions, has only submitted thatthe Union of India had not conveyed its views on the construction of the provisions of the several statutes and that it desires to await the decision of the courts on the issues. Why the Full Bench?

( 6 ) AGGRIEVED by the certificate dated 14-6-2004 issued by the Deputy Registrar of co-operative Societies and Officeron Special duty of the Vasavi Co-operative Urban Bank limited, Hyderabad, ordering recovery of about Rs. 33 lakhs towards the debt due to the Vasavi Bank, W. P. No. 18535 of 2004 was filed. A learn