SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 24632

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T. Madhavi, J
Maddineni Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 15677 OF 2024|WRIT PETITION NO. 20925 OF 2024



The authorities under the Telangana Cooperative Societies Act are mandatorily required to act upon inquiry reports conducted under Section 51; the power to supersede a managing committee under Section 34 is distinct and exists independently of surcharge proceedings initiated under Section 60 of the Act.

Headnote:(A) Telangana Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 - Sections 34, 51, 60 - Supersession of Managing Committee - Inaction by authorities on representations - The core issue involved is the failure of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies to act upon inquiry reports and representations regarding alleged irregularities under Section 51 of the Act. The court observed that supersession of a committee under Section 34 is independent of surcharge proceedings under Section 60. The court directed the authorities to take expeditious decisions on pending representations and inquiry reports.

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Suppression of facts - High Court jurisdiction is equitable and discretionary; petitioners must come to court with clean hands and disclose all past/present litigation relating to the subject matter. Failure to disclose material information can result in being non-suited for abusing the legal process.

Facts of the case:
The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to compel authorities to initiate action against the Managing Committee of a cooperative housing society for alleged financial irregularities, unauthorized membership admissions, and non-compliance with previous court orders. Multiple writ petitions were filed alleging inaction on representations regarding Section 51 inquiry reports.

Findings of Court:
While noting that some previous litigation was not disclosed, the court found the petitioner's overall conduct sufficient to proceed. The court held that the authorities have a statutory duty to act on inquiry reports under the Act. It directed the respondents to resolve the pending representations and initiate necessary follow-up actions within specified timeframes.

Issues: Whether the inaction of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies on representations and Section 51 inquiry reports is justified, and whether the writ petition is maintainable despite alleged suppression of facts.

Ratio Decidendi: Supersession of a managing committee under Section 34 of the Act is a process independent of surcharge proceedings under Section 60. Authorities are mandated to act upon inquiry reports initiated under the Act, and their failure to do so warrants judicial intervention. Equitable relief remains contingent on the petitioner's disclosure of relevant litigation.

Result: Petitions disposed of with directions to respondents to take decisions/actions within designated periods.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's plea for supersession of management due to alleged irregularities. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. respondent's defense regarding maintainability and existence of alternative remedies. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court's analysis of statutory duties and independent nature of supersession under section 34. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. requirement of clean hands and disclosure of material facts in writ petitions. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
5. final orders directing authorities to act on pending representations and inquiries. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)

COMMON ORDER

W.P.No.15677 of 2024

In W.P.No.15677 of 2024, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of respondents No.2 and 3 against the Managing Committee of respondent No.4 society under Section 34 of the Telangana Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’) in spite of the petitioner’s representations dt.28.05.2024 and 01.06.2024, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of the provisions of Section 34 of the Act and the bye-laws of respondent No.4 society and in violation of principles of natural justice and to consequently direct respondents No.1 to 3 to suspend/supersede the managing committee of respondent No.4 society and to appoint an official administrator to conduct fresh elections by convening general body meeting and to scrutinise the names of the valid members in the list of the electoral college of respondent No.4 society and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.No.15677 of 2024 are that respondent No.4 society was established and registered under Regd.No.TBC-608 and was initially formed with 4213 members who are all involved in film industry including movie directors, producers and artists. The Government of Andhra Pradesh allotted Ac.67.16 guntas of land in favour of respondent No.4 society in the year 1994 and the allotment of flats and row houses was made by the Committee consisting of 5 members. The petitioner claims to be one of the members of the society. It is stated that the society has later admitted 584 members as on 31.03.2022, although 422 members were already on waiting list for allotment of housing units and that this led to so many irregularities in the society in the allotment of plots. It is further submitted that the Divisional Cooperative Officer, Hyderabad (West), Ranga Reddy, vide Rc.No.557-2003-H, dt.17.02.2016, had directed respondent No.4 society to prepare a list of such members who surrendered and transferred their allotted flats and to remove their membership from the society as per the provisions of the bye-laws and the Act and Rules and to take necessary action and place the action taken report in the matter within 30 days from the date of receipt of the said letter. However, respondent No.4 society failed to take necessary action. It is submitted that the petitioner and others have brought to the notice of respondents No.2 and 3 various irregularities being committed by respondents No.4 and 5, but respondents No.2 and 3 have not taken any action thereon. It is submitted that the District Cooperative Officer, Ranga Reddy District, vide Rc.No.2128/2017-H dt.15.12.2022, had directed respondent No.4 not to deviate from the original allotments made by the Five Men Committee and to cancel all irregular allotments made by the society and also not to register any housing units without getting clearance from the District Cooperative Officer, Ranga Reddy District and that the Sub-Registrar, Vattinagulapally was also requested not to register the units until the clearance of the District Cooperative Officer, Ranga Reddy District was given. It is submitted that some of the members of the society approached this Court by filing W.P.No.46502 of 2022 and batch to issue a Writ of Mandamus against respondent No.4 society to supersede the Managing Committee of the society and this Court was pleased to dispose o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top