ORDER :

As all these cases raise the same issues, they are being disposed of by way of this common order.

2. The provisions of A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’) require management of every cooperative society to be vested with the managing committee, which is an elected body. These elections are to be held periodically. However, on some occasions, when elections could not be held for any reason and the term of the previously elected body expires, Section 32 (7)(1) of the Act empowers the State Government to appoint a person in-charge or a committee of persons in-charge to manage the affairs of the society, till an election for constituting the next managing committee can be held. The provisions of Section 32(7)(a) is as follows :

Section 32(7)(a)(i) If there is no committee or in the opinion of the Government or, the Registrar, it is not possible to call a general meeting for the purpose of conducting election of members of the committee, the Government, in respect of such class of societies as may be prescribed and the Registrar in all other cases may appoint a person or persons to manage the affairs of the society for a period not exceeding six months and the Government may, on their own and the Registrar with the previous approval of the Government, extend, from time to time, such period beyond six months, so however that the aggregate period include the extended period if any, shall not exceed three years.

(ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in the special circumstances and for the reasons to be recorded, if in the opinion of the Government, it is not possible to hold the elections to the societies or class of societies, the Government may, by order, extend the term of the person or the persons appointed to manage the affairs of the society or class of societies beyond three years but not exceeding, six years in aggregate.

(b) ----------------

(c) ----------------

(d) ----------------

3. It appears that the term of the elected management committees in Cooperative Societies across the State has expired some time back and elections to a large number of these societies had not been conducted. The Government, invoking the power under Section 32(7), and the Registrar in some cases, had appointed either a single person in-charge committee or a three member person in-charge committee for all such societies. In that process, the petitioners in these writ petitions who were either members or part of the erstwhile managing committees of the societies were appointed as persons in-charge of their respective societies.

4. After their term as persons in-charge had expired the Government/ Registrar had either appointed other persons as persons in-charge or the petitioners have not been continued as persons in-charge and the petitioners apprehend that other persons would be appointed as persons in-charge in their place. On the basis of this apprehension or on the basis of their replacement by other persons, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of the present set of writ petitions.

5. The challenge of the petitioners, in these cases, is twofold. Firstly, the language of Section 32(7)(a) of the Act has to be interpreted to mean that once a person in-charge has been appointed, the appointing authority can, at best, extend the term of such a person and no power is available to the appointing authority to change the person, who has initially being appointed as the person in-charge. Secondly, the said Rule read in conjunction with the other provisions of the Act, require the appointing authority to appoint only the members of the society or the erstwhile management of the society as persons in-charge and no outsider can be appointed unless it is shown that the earlier management had mismanaged the affairs of the society or misappropriated the funds of the society.

6. Sri V.V.N. Narayana Rao, and Sri K. Rama Mohan Mahadeva, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners rely, in support of the first gr