( 1 ) THIS common order shall dispose of these two writ petitions. W. P. No. 18835 of 2003 is filed by the Voltas employees Co-operative House Building society, Secunderabad, seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not completing the Special Audit as ordered by proceedings, dated 23. 7. 2002 and 18. 2. 2003 as illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of A. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (hereafter called the Act ) and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. W. P. No. 20446 of 2003 is filed by ten (10) persons challenging the proceedings of district Co-operative Audit Officer, dated 18. 2. 2003 as confirmed by the Commissioner of Co-operation and Registrar of Co- operative Societies (the first respondent) by an order, dated 11. 9. 2003, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to appoint another officer to conduct a comprehensive enquiry into the day-to-day affairs of Voltas Employees Co- operative House Building Society.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to filing of these writ petitions may be noted in brief by noticing the pleadings in W. P. No. 20446 of 2003, by referring to the parties as they are arrayed therein. The sixth respondent was registered under the provisions of the act in the year 1981. The said Society was allegedly running smoothly till a new managing Committee was constituted in the year 2000. The petitioners are members of the erstwhile Managing Committee. It is alleged that, in the year 1996, thirty-seven (37) persons made an application, to be admitted as members. They were admitted by the sixth respondent, acting upon the directions issued by the Deputy Registrar (Housing ). However, in 1999, the Managing committee cancelled the admission of ineligible thirty-seven (37) members. Challenging the same, W. P. No. 3720 of 1999 was filed, which was dismissed. The division Bench in W. A. No. 1056 of 1999, disposed of the Writ Appeal, leaving it open to the Society to decide with respect to the membership of those persons without taking into consideration the directions issued by the Deputy Registrar or the registrar of Co-operative Societies. This dispute regarding membership, lead to a sinister plan against the petitioners. Therefore, the members opposed to the petitioners initiated action before the Co-operative officials, Co-operative Tribunal, Criminal courts as well as this Court, some of which were dismissed at the admission stage and in some others, the petitioners are defending the cases.

( 3 ) THE District Co-operative Officer, hyderabad (Urban), ordered an enquiry under Section 51 of the Act by proceedings, dated 28. 5. 1998. The Co-operative Sub- registrar conducted enquiry and submitted a report, dated 28. 9. 1998 to the effect that there are no irregularities in the affairs of the sixth respondent, Society. Not satisfied with the same, some members made a representation, dated 30. 9. 1998 requesting for another enquiry. The Joint Registrar/ district Co-operative Officer again ordered enquiry under Section 51 of the Act, with an observation that what is left and uncovered in the earlier enquiry, be covered in the new enquiry ordered. The second enquiry Officer submitted a report on 30. 11. 2001 basing on which the Deputy registrar of Co-operative Societies issued show-cause notices under Section 60 of the Act by proceedings, dated 14. 12. 2001. Some of the aggrieved persons filed writ petitions being W. P. Nos. 1145 and 4379 of 2002. Other persons filed their explanations to the show-cause notices in the surcharge proceedings.

( 4 ) AGAIN representations were made to the Departmental Officials on 18. 12. 1999, 23. 2. 2000 and 13. 9. 2000 seeking re-audit of the sixth respondent, Society. The department did not take any action. Some of the members therefore filed W. P. No. 19002 of 2000 seeking a direction to Departmental officials to re-audit the affairs of the sixth respondent by an interim order dated