High Court · 2025

Petitien under Articre 226 of the constitution ot rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a ryrit of mandamus, declaring the actions of Respondent No. 4 in submitting Election Proposals vide proceedings dt.24.05.202b while encrosing a voters list with only 3128 members, i.e., by excruding the names of members who are not employees of the Indian Audit and Accounts Department and the actions of figspondent No. 2 in issuing Rc. No. g36/2024-Hsg dt. 1s.04.2025 directing the inc lus;ron of only serving and retired employee rre.nbers of the 4th Respondent in th,: said voters list as illegal, arbitrz ry unreasonable, unconstitution al. ag ainst the principa[s pf natural justic;e violative of the provisions of t re ,Act, the Rules 4nd (he byelawg, and u,lsustainable, to conseqUently direcl Respgndent Nos. 2 anQ 4 to ipclude the, rrarres of rnembefo who are not eml)lovees gf the lndian Audit and Accounts Departnent in the said voters li$t. IA :tOE2 2 i Petition urrder Section 151 QPC praying that in the circurstances itated in the affidavit filed in srpport of the petition, tlhe High court may be pleased to otay all fu(her proce ed ngs including the issqing of election nqtifi,ration, filing o{ nominalions in tle e'lections, polling and declaration of results pursuant tq the 4th Respondents letter rlt. 24.05.2025, the voters list enclosed ther er,riith and the 21d Respondents pr()ceedings vide Rc. No g3Al20Z4-Hsg dt. 11 0,4.2025 pending diqposal of the wr it p r,tition Gpunsel for the [)etitioner: SBt M. PRATHEEK REDDY Counse_l for the Flespondents: SRI BHARATH KUMAR VEMULA, AGP FOR COOPERATION The Cogrt made 1'he following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K.SUJANA WRIT PETITION No. 15454 of 2O2S ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners against the Election Proposals uide proceedings dated 24.05.2025 submitted by respondent No.4 excluding the names of members who are not employees of the Indian Audit and Accounts Department from voters list and the petiticner also challenging the issuance of RC.No 836 of 2O24-Hsg dated 15.O4.2O25 by respondent No.2 directing the inclusion of only serving and retired employee members of respondent No 4 in the said votcrs list. Heard Sri M.Pratheek Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners

2. and Sri Bharath Kumar Vemula, learned Assistant Government Pleader for resPondent Nos. 1 to 3.

3. Learned counsei for the petitiondrs submitted that the petitioners were excluded from the election proposals of Accountants' General Office Employees Co-operative Housing Society Ltd , on 24.05.2025 as per the Bye-laws Nos.21 and 22 of the Society and as per the norms of the voters of the Society' He further that when the retired employees challenged the said Bye-Laws of the Society' the names of the retired employees were included as members in the said voterslistofthesocietyonls.o4.2o2S.Healsosubmittedthatthough ) tA.t../ l:t, \t, l -;1 cilt); the petitioncrs radc representation to the concerned iuthorities for inclusion of hr' names of the members who arc, not er tployces of Indran Auclit €rn( Accounts Department in the said v()ters lisl, lhe authorities ar r Lr b()ut to issue election notification u.ithcu t c eciding the same causing pre juclice to the petitioners. Hence, he prai erl the Court to direct resptn:l :nt Nos.2 and 4 to includes the name; c f members who are nor, e tn:.rlor,ees of the Indian Audit and Accounts I)epartment in the said voterl., list.

4. On thc otlrer hand, learned Assistant Governmelrt pleader for respondent N ()s I to 3 submitted that neither they re,;eived any representatic,r lr,rm the petitioners nor the petition,trs hled the enclosed thc :ofr... of lhe said representation. Hence, he ytrayed the Court to dism s., r rc u ril petition.

5. In vit:,,r, c,f thr: submissions made by both the par ir:s, this Court has perusei th.) lt:lterial avaitable on record. It is app,a ret rt that the representatirtn ::rrrcle by the petitioners was not re,-:t,ivr:d by the concerned aulhor-it). Hence, considering the facts and c:rc tmstances of the case, tl is (lourl is inclined to direct the petitionc rs to submit their represe r t;r i -rtl before concerned authority and n turn, the concerned ar-Ltri.rri[ is directed to decide the same wittri I r period of one (01) weck lrr rn the date of receipt of such represenL.rtion before issuing electiorr n tt ification. l s(.s.J LltP l'o 15a51 oj2025 6 With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed SD/-P. PONNA KRISHNA A SISTANT REGISTRAR , l I i //TRUE COPY// To, 1 The PrinciPal Secretary, Department of CooPe tion, Secretariat, Hyderqbad, TG secnoru oFFlcER State of Telangana' derabad Division, Sth

2. The DePuty Begistr4r of CooPeIativq Societies, Secun Floor, Gruha katpa Building, Nam pally, Hyderabad, Telangana The State CQoperatlve Election Autfiority' Telangana' Gruhakalpa Building' t'..tamp6tty, Hyderabad, Telanqana' One CC to $Rl M pp,q16EEK REDDY' Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs tq SRI PHARATH KUMAR VEMU!4,-49-P for Cooperation' High clltii"iilE Stri"ir i'iangana at Hvflerabad [oUr] Two CD Copies 3 4 6 6 MP BS .#, VACATION COURT HIGH COURT DATED:04t0612025 k{ E IJTA rE l_ 0 6 JtiN 2m , () /: l<: 1,.( /-):l 1i) ir- \ ., lt' i:: (. c * OtsDEN WP.No.15464 ol20tS DISPOSING OF THE WRIT' PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0 n 1 6 L b