As the issues raised in these Writ Petitions are common, they are heard and being disposed of together.

For convenience, the respondents are referred as they are arrayed in W.P.No.5238/2013.

The petitioner in W.P.Nos.5238 and 6084 of 2013 is common. He has filed W.P.No.5238/2013 for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in postponing the declaration of result of election of the office bearers i.e., Chairman/President and Vice Chairman/Vice President of the Warangal District Co-operative Central Bank Limited (for short “the Central Bank”) under notice dated 19-2-2013 as illegal and arbitrary. He has also filed W.P.No.6084/2013 for a mandamus to declare proceedings Rc.No.3523-17/2013/Election Cell, dated 25-2-2013 of respondent No.2 whereby he has cancelled the election process for the office bearers of the Central Bank and directed commencement of fresh election process, as illegal and arbitrary.

Eleven Directors of the Central Bank have filed W.P.No.5365/2013 for an identical relief as claimed in W.P.No.5238/2013.

W.P.No.6103/2013 has been filed by two co-opted members questioning proceedings dated 25-2-2013 of respondent No.2 cancelling the election and for the relief identical to that claimed in W.P.No.6084/2013.

The gist of the averments of the petitioners is stated hereunder:

Respondent No.3-Election Officer issued notice dated 18-3-2013 convening meeting of the Managing Committee members of the Central Bank for the purpose of electing the office bearers, namely, the President and the Vice-President, scheduled to be held on 19-2-2013 at 8 A.M. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that the meeting, as scheduled, was held on 19-2-2013 and that 13 out of the 19 elected Directors of the Central Bank have attended the meeting. As 10 members constituted the coram, respondent No.3 was stated to have commenced the proceedings of the meeting by firstly filling two unfilled S.C. vacancies by way of co-option and thereafter permitted filing of nominations for the posts of the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman. That respondent No.3 notified the list of nominations and also prepared the valid nominations list in terms of Rule 22(12)(b) of the

A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short “the Rules”). That respondent No.3 has obtained the signatures of all the members who attended the meeting and informed all those who are present at the meeting that the election result of the President and Vice President will be announced at 2.30 P.M. on the same day.

When the petitioners were waiting for announcement of the result, respondent No.3 has received telephonic instructions from respondent No.2 for postponement of declaration of results and as a consequence thereof, respondent No.3 had issued proceedings on the same day i.e., 19-2-2013 postponing the elections under a written order. A few days later i.e., on 25-2-2013, respondent No.2 passed an order wherein he has stated that the process of election to the office bearers (upto the stage of scrutiny of nominations) was vitiated and therefore he felt it necessary that the elections to the office bearers of the Central Bank has to be conducted afresh in a free, fair and impartial manner and that as there are certain malafides raised against the Election Officer, he is appointing one Tumma Prasad, DR/Divisional Co-operative Officer, Nalgonda, as the Election Officer in place of respondent No.3 and he was directed to conduct election afresh as per Rule 22-A(5) and Rule 22(12) of the Rules.

As noted hereinbefore, both the postponement and cancellation of the election are questioned in these Writ Petitions separately.

I have heard Sri E. Manohar and Sri K. Ramakrishna Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the respective petitioners, learned Additional Advocate-General for the official respondents and Sri A. Kranti Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the impleaded respondents in W.P.Nos.5238 and 6084/2013.

The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners made the f