Court emphasized the necessity of providing essential loan documents to parties to uphold principles of natural justice, ruling that impugned orders issued without such provision are invalid.

ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition was filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ or order of direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring:

i. the Order of 2^nd respondent issued under Rc.No.67/DR-OSD/Legal Section/2024, dated 14.06.2024 without considering the Objections, dated 04.06.2024 of the petitioners to the show-cause notice, dated 14.05.2024;

ii. the inaction of respondent Nos.2 to 5 in furnishing the documents relating to the loan said to have been availed by the father of the petitioners from 5^th respondent and/or the Award said to have been passed in Claim No.155/2021-22, dated 01.05.2021 by 3^rd respondent, enabling the petitioners to avail their legal remedies under the provisions of the Cooperative Societies Act, 1912; as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and set-aside the order of 2^nd respondent, dated 14.06.2024 and consequently, direct the respondent Nos.2 to 5 to furnish all the documents submitted by 5^th respondent with 3^rd respondent relating to Claim No.155/2021-22 including the Certificate/Decree, dated 01.05.2021 issued by 3^rd respondent under Section 71 of the APCS Act, 1964 enabling the petitioners to avail the remedies under law and/or pass such other order or orders…”

2. (a) Contents of the affidavit filed by 2^nd petitioner, in brief, are that 2^nd petitioner is the younger brother of 1^st petitioner and he gave affidavit on his behalf and on behalf of 1^st petitioner. On 04.02.2024, 2^nd petitioner was informed by the Secretary of 5^th respondent that his father availed loan from 5^th respondent during February, 2019 for purchase of sheep and stressed them to make payment against the said loan; that on 20.03.2024, petitioners got issued legal notice to 5^th respondent demanding them to furnish documents, relating to the alleged loan transaction, said to have contracted by their father; that 5^th respondent got issued reply notice, dated 06.04.2024 stating that an amount of Rs.4,76,700/- was sanctioned to their father to purchase sheep and upon his instructions the said amount was paid to one Mr. Nagendra Reddy and their father was said to have executed all the relevant documents including mortgaging the property on 02.03.2019. It was also stated in the reply notice that the father of petitioners made part payment of Rs.21,400/- on 19.03.2021 and demised thereafter and thus, the petitioners being the legal heirs, they are liable to pay the debt; that in the reply notice, it was further stated that 5^th respondent initiated proceedings before 3^rd respondent vide Claim No.155/2021-22 for the amount due, being the installment due as on the date.

(b) The respondent No.5 did not furnish the documents relating to the said loan transactions; that on 18.04.2024, 2^nd petitioner made an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for brevity ‘the RTI Act, 2005’) to furnish the information, but the said application was rejected by respondent Nos.4 and 5 on the premise that the provisions of the RTI Act are not applicable to them. While so, 2^nd respondent issued show-cause notice, dated 14.05.2024 stating that 3^rd respondent was said to have issued Certificate/Decree under Section 71 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for brevity ‘the APCS Act, 1964’) for an amount of Rs.1,77,698/- with further interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum from the date 01.05.2021 till the date of realization vide Claim No.155/2021-22, dated 01.05.2021.

(c) In response to the said notice, 2^nd petitioner submitted a repres