1. The lis on hand has arisen consequent to the order impugned dated 03.08.2015 issued by the third respondent, holding that with reference to the letters cited in the reference stipulated in the impugned order, it is stated that a final decision of the competent authority of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as BSNL) was communicated to the writ petitioner in their office letter dated 24.08.2013 and the petitioner was advised to take suitable remedial action as deemed fit for recovery from the borrowers. It is once again stated that the loan applications were not authenticated / authorised by the Accounts Officer(Pay & Claims).

2. The letter referred dated 24.08.2013 states that already the writ petitioner was informed that the loan applications were not authenticated / authorised by the Accounts Officer(Pay & Claims), office of the GM Telecom, Tirupathi for recovery from the pay and allowances of the officials. Accordingly, the petitioner was advised to take suitable remedial action as deemed fit for recovery of the same from the borrowers.

3. On a perusal of the impugned orders, it is made clear that even before the year 2013, the respondents had informed to the petitioners that the loan applications submitted by the respective members of the petitioner society were not authenticated / authorised by the Accounts Officer(Pay & Claims) of BSNL. Thus, they are not obligated to recover directly from the salary of the BSNL employees and pay it to the writ petitioner's Cooperative Society. It seems that such a reply was given to the writ petitioner's Cooperative Society for many times and frequently. However, the petitioner has chosen to challenge the same only in the present writ petition during the year 2016. Thus, there is a delay even on the part of the writ petitioner's Cooperative Society in pursuing their remedy, knowing the fact that the respondent authority had informed them that they have not authenticated / authorised the loan applications submitted by the members to the writ petitioner's Cooperative Society for their borrowings.

4. The writ petitioner is the Government Telecommunication Employees Cooperative Society Limited, registered under the provisions of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002. The Cooperative Society was registered by its members and the members are the employees of the BSNL. The employees together constituted a Cooperative Society and registered the same under the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act for the welfare of its members. Thus, a Cooperative Society, which is registered under the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act is absolutely unconnected with the administrative affairs of the BSNL nor the BSNL had involved in respect of the registration of such Cooperative Societies.

5. The writ petitioner states that the main business of the Society is to issue loans to the members, those who are working in the Department of Telecommunication / BSNL. The area of operation of the writ petitioner Society's is all over the States of Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner society is disbursing jewel loans to the needy members and granting them loans as per the terms and conditions. The funds of the society are raised by way of obtaining loans from various Banks and from, thrift deposit from the members besides interest derived from loans. As on date, about 17,000 members have been registered with the society. As per the bye-laws of the society, the loans are disbursed to the members and the maximum limit of Rupees Six Lakh according to their repaying capacity i.e., 20 times of their Basic Pay + Dearness Allowance or 20 times of share capital paid by the member, whichever is less payable in 90 monthly instalments. The writ petitioners have stated membership details and the bye-laws in relation to the activities of the Cooperative Society, which has no much relevancy in respect of the issues raised in this writ petition.

6. The l