ORDER :

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“to issue a Writ direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the conditional attachment order in claim No.386/2022-C, dated 03.06.2022 passed by respondent No.3 for conditional attachment of property belongs to the petitioner under Section 73 of A.P.C.S. Act, 1964 is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of Sections 51, 60 and 73 of Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and in violation of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, consequently set aside the order of conditional attachment of the property belongs to the petitioner, passed in claim No.386/2022-C, dated 03.06.2022 and to pass such other order or orders ….”.

2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is :

Petitioner is Chief Manager of District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Guntur Koritepadu Branch. The said bank is having 42 branches in the District. While petitioner was working as Branch Manager of respondent No.5 bank about 300 loans were given to new members of Gorantla Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society.

While so, basing on a news item published on 11.03.2022 in Eenadu Daily Newspaper regarding fake loans availed by some persons, enquiry was ordered under Section 51 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act (for short ‘the APCS Act’) and vide proceedings in A.O/Estt/2021-22, dated 18.03.2022, petitioner was suspended on the ground that she has violated guidelines in disbursement of loans.

Subsequently, basing on instructions of Chief Executive Officer, Administrative Office, Guntur, respondent No.3 issued notice to petitioner calling for explanation as to why immovable properties shall not be attached. Petitioner submitted her explanation, dated 10.06.2022. The action of respondent No.3 conditionally attaching the immovable property of the petitioner based on representation of respondent No.5 is impermissible and unauthorized and not in accordance with Section 73 of the APCS Act. Respondent No.3 is not competent to issue notice or orders under conditional attachment under Section 73 of the APCS Act. Therefore, challenging order in claim No.386/2022-C, dated 03.06.2022, the present writ petition is filed.

3. Counter affidavit was filed by respondent No.3 on behalf of itself and on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and 4, wherein it is averred that petitioner violated the circulars and guidelines of the Bank while disbursing loans to its members and thereby caused loss to the bank. Basing on claim petition filed by respondent No.3 notice was issued to the petitioner. Inspite of issuance of notice calling for petitioner’s explanation to show cause as to why petitioner’s property should not be attached, petitioner neither submitted her explanation nor furnished security, as such, respondent No.3, who is competent to issue conditional attachment order, in view of G.O.Ms.34, Food & Agrl. (Coop-I), dated 18.01.1989, issued notice and conditionally attached property of the petitioner.

It is further averred that there is nothing wrong in invoking Section 73 of APCS Act, 1964 and petitioner has alternative remedy of preferring appeal under Section 76 of APCS Act, 1964, as such this writ petition is not maintainable. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

4. Respondent No.5 filed counter stating that proceedings were issued against petitioner for dereliction of duty and in not conducting field enquiry before sanctioning loans. As the amount involved in fake loans is huge, respondent No.5 filed claim petition and the conditional attachment order passed by respondent No.3 is proper and as per Section 73 of the APCS Act. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

5. Petitioner filed reply affidavits denying the averments of counters filed by the respondents and submitted that attachment order passed by respondent No.3 is not permissible in view of the ju