A dispute arising among the members of a society registered under the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001, relating to the affairs of the society, is to be resolved through the mechanism provided under Sec. 23 of the Act, which allows for filing an application in the District Court.

JUDGMENT

CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY,J. - The petitioner has invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd respondent Election Officer in rejecting the nomination of the petitioner on the ground that his name is not tallying with the serial number in the voters list, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Rule 22(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Conduct of Election Rules, 1964, and consequently, sought direction to the 3rd respondent to stay further proceedings pursuant to the issuance of election notification, dtd. 29/3/2022.

FACTUAL MATRIX:-

2. The petitioner is an employee working as Sec. Officer in Revenue Department of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat. The 2nd respondent is an Association in the name and style "The Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Sec. Officers ' Association " represented by its President. The petitioner claims to be the member of the said Association and also a voter on the rolls of the electoral roll of the said Association. There is an Executive Committee for the said Association consisting of certain office bearers. As the term of the office bearers of the said Executive Committee expired long back, the Executive Committee of the Association in its meeting held on 11/3/2022 has taken a decision to conduct election of office bearers for the 2nd respondent Association. The said meeting was presided over by Sri T.Venkata Subbaiah, Assistant Secretary, M.A. and U.D. Department, A.P. Secretariat. The date of the election is fixed on 8/4/2022. The 3rd respondent was appointed as Election Officer to conduct the election.

3. Pursuant to the decision taken in the Executive Committee meeting held on 11/3/2022 to conduct election for a period of three years to elect the office bearers of the Executive Committee of the Association, the 3rd respondent Election Officer issued notification on 29/3/2022 to conduct elections. The election schedule as per the said notification is as follows:

JUDGEMENT_29_LAWS(APH)9_2022.jpg

4. The petitioner has submitted his nomination to contest the election for the post of Secretary of the Executive Committee. The 3rd respondent Election Officer has rejected the nomination of the petitioner on the ground that his name is not tallying with the serial number in the voters list that was published. It is stated that the name of the petitioner is clearly shown in the voters list at Sl.No.336, which was circulated by the 2nd respondent Association. Though the serial number furnished by the petitioner in the nomination form is not tallying with the serial number in the voters list, it is stated that the name of the petitioner is clearly found in the voters list and his identity is also well established. Therefore, it is stated that the rejection of the nomination of the petitioner on the ground that the serial number furnished by him in the nomination form is not tallying with the serial number in the voters list, is not valid under law and the nomination of the petitioner was improperly rejected and it was deliberately rejected and the same is contrary to Rule 22(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Conduct of Election Rules, 1964.

5. It is further stated that Sri T. Venkata Subbaiah, who was the former Sec. Officer, has presided over the Executive Committee meeting held on 11/3/2022, in which the decision to conduct the election was taken. He was promoted as Assistant Secretary, M.A. and U.D. Department, A.P. Secretariat, from the cadre of Sec. Officer on 24/3/2020 itself and he was relieved from the post of Sec. Officer on 8/4/2020. Therefore, as he was promoted that he ceased to be the Sec. Officer and consequently, he also ceased to be the member of the 2nd respondent Association. So, he is not competent to preside over the meeting of the Executive Committee. Further it is stated that the 3rd respondent is appointed as Election Officer pursuant to the decision taken in t