The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellants: SRI DUWA PAVAN KUMAR' REP' FOR SRI SURYA TEJ.P.N.J Counsel for the Respondent No'1 to 3: SRI R'DHEERAJ SINGH Counsel for the Respondent No'4 to 6: GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for the Respondent No'7 & 8: SRI L'ARAVIND REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No'9 to 14: SRI PREETHAM KUNAPA REDDY The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT I j I -/ \ THE HON'BI,E THE ACTING CHIEF JUSrICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HONBLE SMT. JUSTTCE RENUKA YARA WRIT APPEAL No.274 of 2O25 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon,ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy paut) Sri Durrva pavan Kumar, iearned counsel reI)resenting Sri Surya Tej F,.N.J., learned counsel for the appellants and Sri R.Dheeraj Singh, learned counsei for respondents No. l to 3.

2. During the ,:ourse of hearing, learned counsel lcr the parties reached to a consensus. It is agreed that since the r:legfisns 1e th. appella,t No.1 - Iiociety are already scheduled on 05.04.1i025 and the election process is in full swing, let the elections; take place on the said date. It..s agreed that a direction may be issuecl so that the elections take place in accordance with law. It is als,:r agreed that if anyone is aggrieved by the election pro,less iLnd the outcome of the ele,:tions, he/she can avail the appropriate remedy in accordance with law before appropriate forum.

3. Learned counsel for both sides agreed that the question of maintainability of trre writ petition against a private cooperative society, including availability of the a-lternative remedv before appropriate forum, may be left open to be decid"O ,r, .., appropnate case. I t I i 2 In view of the consensus arrived at between the learned 4 counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) t€t the elections to the appellant No.1 - Society be held as scheduled in accordance with law; If anyone is aggrieved by the election process and/or ii) result, tre/ she may assail the same before appropriate forum; and iii) The legal question about the maintainability of the writ petition like the instant writ petition and question of availabilif of the alternative remedy shall remain open to be decided in an aPProPriate case. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed' There shall be no order as to costs' //TRUE COPY// SD/. K.SHYLESHI JOINT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER J centrar Secretariat' To, 1 2 3 I[: ",.Ji:Bfdl'ff.%::txat'":ffi1'15-t'.%3yr?epartment' T3;.3:"0"n:'8'il?:I: flTf5i': iks,iut - .':L':fi3['"'"x'"J'"iii The District Cooperative.Officer, Rangareddy District lnleorated District Office i ri Jd;,' " Tb;;h''* p'1 n a m u"a n d a t' Ra nsa red d v Sffir.f 1;fJ#jl"'ii,"'i " "v n

4. One CC to SRt SURYA TEJ.P.N.J, Advocate tOpUCl 5 O.ne CC to SRt R.DHEERAJ SINGH, Advocate tOpUCl 6. One CC to SRt pREETHAM t. One CC to SRI |_.ARAVIND REDDY, Advocate tOpUCj u KUNAPA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] L*,9r3"";llf6[?i cooPERArloN' Hish court for the state of retansana

9. Two CD Copie:s BSR BS 6 HIGH COURT DATED: 01104t2025 I \ JUDGMENT WA.No.274 of 2025 I I --i ,,. ,.',t\. =-=_--:::- iE. li 14 r O ; API] Z a DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL, WITHOUT COSTS d,| W