High Court · 2025

petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay the proposed Annual generar body meeting schedured on 23_03_2025 0f the Sth respondent society in terms of notice dated 16-03-2025, pending disposar of the main writ petition lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Between: "]'t};lu$ffil;r$pimffi r^,alfare Housing Society' at 1-2-608 to ,r,#:,.ii,i*r_i.tu':t-#""*T; Hyderabao ..PETITIoNERS'RESP0NDENTS I AND 1i"i,f 608, 609 to 5OOO8O. itri"!"":??i,ilisiBT:tBFil:'..t$ffi 62U' UAI VAYU I ".. 3}.rJ;fri#;u:;;ir PETITIONER ...RESPONDENTTWRIT j::'$"f:::::;:::T:: :l}!dmh;*::'3rTit*uEr'#;{:"J" i +i:f8ffi3i3""o"rrtive Resistrar, Hvderabad District' Gruhakalpa Buildinss' soci eti es' Gor ko n d a Resio n' H vderab ad' : ffi nl"Hlt s,t**t t',fr?""?:t?'i:e No'1to5 ..RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS PetitionunderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto vacatetheinterimstayorderpassedinl.A.No.lof2025inWPNo.SSOlof2025 dt.2110312025 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI' K' DURGA PRASAD Counsel for theRespondent Nos' 1to4: GP fOn COOpERATION Counsel for the Respondent No'5: SRI KISTAIAH Counselfor the Respondent No'6: SRI PRATHEEK REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER TIIE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTTCE T. MADIIAVI DEVI I ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the 5rh respondent in proposing to conduct the annuar generar body meeting on 23.03.2025 contrary to Bye_raw No'36(a) of the society and Bye-raw No.3 2 of Terangana cooperative societies Act, 1964(for short, 'the Act,) as per notice dt.16.03.2025, as illegal and arbitrary and consequentry to direct responden ts 2 to 4 to initiate action for conduct of a statutory enquiry into the affairs of the 5fr respondent society by appointing a speciar officer and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts reading to the firing of the present.writ petition are that the petitioner is a member of the 5'h respondent society which was registered i-nJhe year 2012. It is stated that there are about 530 members in the society and it is maintaining the welfare and maintenance of the residential multi storied building and is having an elected body as per the Cooperative Societies Act to look into the affairs of the society. It is W.P.No.8801 of2025 2 submiffed that the Managing committee of the society is elected every 5 yearsandunderBye-lawNo.36,ageneralbodymeetingcanbecalled forduringtheyearatanytimeeitheronrequestorasperbye-lawanda minimumoftwogeneralbodymeetingsinayearhavetobeconducted, i.e.,ameetinginevery6months.Itisstatedthatanadvancenoticefora generalbodymeetingof20cleardaysistobeissuedunderBye-law No.36(a)ofthesociety.Further,itisalsostatedthatasperSection32of the Act, the President of the society has to make a request to the Registrarforconductofatleastonegeneratbodymeetinginayearin thepresenceofrepresentativeornomineeoftheRegistrarandthe requesthastobemadewithatleast15cleardaysnotice.[tisalleged that the impugned notice dt.16.03'2025 was issued with several agenda pointsforthegeneralbodymeetingtobeheldon23.03.2025and alleging that the said notice is not with 20 days clear notice and alleging mismanagement of the affairs of the society, the petiioner has filed the present Writ Petition'

3. Vide orders dt.21 .03.2025 in I.A.No.| of 2025, this Court was pleased to stav the general body meeting schedured to be herd on

23.03.2025. W.P.No.880l of2025 3

4. The 6ft respondent in his personal capacity and also representing the 5ft respondent, has filed a counter affidavit along with a stay vacate petition. It is stated that the notice for general body meeting to be held on 23.03.2025 was issued well in advance on 18.02.2025 and was sent to all the members through e-mail addresses properly and that the petitioner also has received the said notice on 28.02.2025 and had also suggested certain agenda items to be included in the general body meeting proposed to be held on 23.03.2025, but, without disclosing the same, the petitioner has obtained interim stay of the general body meeting by misrepresenting the facts before this Court. It is submitted that the notice dt.16.03.2025 is only a reminder of the meeting and it is not a notice issued under Bye-law No.36 of the society. Further, with regard to the enquiry into the affairs of the society, it is stated that there is no mismanagement in the affairs of the society as alleged and in fact, the petitioner has indulged in malpractices and has collected bribe amount from the painting contactors illegally by blackmailing and demanding money from them. It is stated that only to cover up his laches, the petitioner has made allegations in this Writ Petition. As regards the altegation that the 5h respondent society is not holding two general body meetings in a year as required under Section 32 of the Act, W.P.No.880l of2025 4 it is submitted that the society is convening general body meetings twice in a year by giving proper notice to all the members. Therefore, they prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition and vacation of the interim order to enable the respondents to conduct general body meeting expeditiously.

5. An additional affidavit and a counter affidavit have also been filed by the 6'r' respondent in his personal capacity as well submitting that the petitioner has not come to Court with clean hands and therefore, there has to be a finding to this effect and action against him for the same. The documents to demonstrate that actual notice dt.16.02.2025 was also issued along with the agenda and that the petitioner has also suggested inclusion of certain other items in the agenda, are also placed on record.

6. The pet.itioner has also filed a reply affidavit.

7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the respondents have issued the notice dt.16.02.2025 for holding general body meeting on21.03.2025. In the letter dt.28.02.2025, the members were also requested to send their points to be listed in the AGBM under various agenda by e-mail in V/.P.No.8801 of 2025 5 writing to the Secretary and the writ petitioner also has suggested some changes to the agenda vide e-mail dt.28.02.2025 and there was also a correspondence from the society to the petitioner on 15.03.2025. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that clear notice of 20 days has not been given by the 5'h respondent society, is incorrect.

8. [n the repty filed to the counter filed by the 5'h and 6'h respondents, the petitioner has denied the same and it is submitted that as per the bye-laws, a notice has to be issued along with agenda and it should be communicated by giving 20 clear days, but in this case, the respondents have issued notice only on 16.03.2025 and therefore, it is against the bye-laws of the society. The other submissions of the respondents as well as the petitioner are on various items of agenda of the meeting.

9. Upon hearing both the parties and upon perusal of all the relevant documents, this Court is of the opinion that the notice for the general body meeting has been properly given and that the petitioner has not been fair in bringing out the real facts to the notice of this Court. If the petitioner is of the opinion that the notice dt.16.02.2025 communicated to him through e-mail is not in accordance with law, as it did not contain t I -:{** i t t I I \ =\ W.P.Nc'.S801 of 2025 6 the points of agenda, the petitioner should have mentioned the same in the writ affidavit. But the petitioner had portrayed as though the notice dt.16.03.2025 is the only notice given. Therefore, this Court does not appreciate the conduct of the writ petitioner. The decision of the 5'h respondent society not to include the items proposed by the petitioner in their agenda o[ the meeting cannot be the subject matter of this Writ Petition

10. Therefore, this Court is inclined to direct the 5tl' respondent to issue a fresh notice with 20 days of clear notice and hold the general body meeting of the society in accordance with the bye-laws of the society. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. The petitioner is imposed with costs of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) to be paid to the 5th respondent society for misrepresenting and obtaining interim order from this Court on the basis of such misrepresentation.

11. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. sD/- A. SRE ENIVASA REDDY STRAR ASSISTANT REGI

1. The Principal Secretary, Cooperative T.S.,Hyderabad. Soartmen t, Secretariat, TANT REGISTRAR N OFFICER I Hyderabad at Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner and Registrar, Cooperative Societies, State of Telangana 3. The District Cooperative Registrar, Hyderabad District, Gruhakalpa Buildings, : Hir'-ffiy^$,",,fi1i13:' Hcfi:EiX,ie 5. One CC to SRt. K.DURGA PRASAD, Advocate tOpUCl 6' Two CCs to GP FOR COOPERATION ,High Cou'rt for thb State of Telangana 7. One CC to SRl. M. PRATHEEK REDDy, Advocate [OpUC] 8. One CC to SRl. T. KISTAIAH, Advocate [OpUC] 9. Two CD Copies societies' Gorkonda Resion' Hvderabad' I at Hyderabad [OUTJ BM PVL ffi ;i;8,$'ffi#iri:#i:i**,;ir; .' .:..l.r.- ...-.'r <.y..,^:: \r, .. '-'4 .\_ay , :' . ...r:;*:-rr : , .1.. :;i P.*d+r*.*l*:. - HIGH COURT DATED:1511012025 12t12t2025 t I AMENDED ORDER WP.No.8801 ot 2025 CC TODAY + TE .$^ t& l.- d- .$ ltt * + ( ( DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION