Procedural irregularities in the conversion of a co-operative society do not invalidate the conversion if debts are cleared and legal requirements met.

1.The petitioners 3 in number, are the trade unions consisting of staff and workers of the A.P. Dairy Development Co - operative Federation 4th respondent herein filed this writ petition questioning the conversion of Vijaya Visakha District Co - operative Milk Producers Union Limited as a Vijaya Visakha Milk Producers Mutually Aided Co - operative Union Limited under A.P. Mutually Aided Co - operative Societies Act, 1995 (Act 30 of 1995) on various grounds by impleading the Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandary and Fisheries Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Registrar of Co - operative Societies, A.P. Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as RCS, A.P. Dairy Development Co - operative Federation (hereinafter referred to as federation), District Co - operative Officer, Visakhapatnam and Vijaya Visakha District Co - operative Milk Producers Union Limited which stood converted as Vijaya Visakha Milk Producers Mutually Aided Co - operative Union Limited as respondents 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 respectively.

2 This Court while admitting the writ petition by order dated 16-7-1999 suspended the incorporation of the 7th respondent in WPMP No. 17948 of 1999 under APMACS Act, 1995 for a period of one month. Thereafter, the 7th respondent file W.V.M.P. No. 1938 of 1999 seeking vacation of the interim suspension granted by this Court on 16-7 - 1999. Having heard the arguments on both sides, by order dated 13-8-1999 interim suspension was extended until further orders. Thereafter, one U. Suribabu, claiming to be a resident of Yelluppi village, Subbavaram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District filed WPMP 19088/99 on 23-7-1999 seeking to implead himself as 8th respondent in the above writ petition claiming to be the group leader of the persons supplying milk at village milk collection centre. On 21-8-1999 three milk producers Co - operative Societies in Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District filed WPMP No. 20095 of 1999 seeking permission of the Court to get themselves impleaded as respondents 9 to 11 in the above writ petition. Having heard the arguments of the counsel for the petitioners in both the WPMPs, I am inclined to order both the WPMPs. The official respondents 1, 3, 4 as well as proposed respondents 8 to 11 supported the case of the petitioners in the writ petition and taken the stand that conversion of 7th respondent as mutually Aided Co - operative Union is illegal and the incorporation certificate issued by the 5th respondent has to be cancelled. At the outset, I would like to observe that this Court witnessed for the first time that the official respondents have taken a stand against their subordinate and in fact the 3rd respondent RCS has gone one step further and initiated disciplinary proceedings against the 5th respondent i.e., District Co - operative Officer, Vasakhapatnam by contending that the said officer incorporated the 7th respondent Union in gross violation of the provisions of MACS Act as well as norms issued by the 3rd respondent and even without referring the matter to the Functional Registrar / Milk Commissioner and thereby misused the statutory powers conferred on him. With the result, the 5th respondent i.e., District Co - operative Officer, Visakhapatnam was forced to engage a counsel of his own to defend his action.

3. In sum and substance, the main grievance of these respondents as seen from their pleadings is that if the 7t