Karnam Satyanarayana v. The State Of Telangana And 16 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.18103 OF 2019 Date:22.08.2019 Between:

Karnam Satyanarayana, S/o. Gopaiah, Aged about 64 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Medaram Village, Neredcherla Mandal, Suryapet District, Telangana State .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Registration and Stamps Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.18103 OF 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

2.

Petitioner claims to be an agriculturist having agricultural land of Acs.15.00 in Lingala Village. According to petitioner, the State and Central Governments have formulated number of schemes to promote the farming activity and to uplift the living conditions of the farmers or people living on agriculture. In order to avail such benefits, societies have to be formed and registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 and the Central and State Governments extend financial support to such societies. Petitioner now alleges that the 5th respondent - society is formed by taking advantage of the various schemes formulated by the Central and State Governments and respondents 6 to 17 have styled themselves as elected Executive Body Members of 'Sri Aurobindo Institute of Rural Development' and are misusing the funds provided to the society. Having come to know about illegal activities, petitioner complained to the District Registrar and other authorities. Alleging inaction on the said complaints, this Writ Petition is filed.

3.

Admittedly, petitioner is not a member of the 5th respondent - society. Petitioner only sought to contend that as an agriculturist, he is entitled to become a member of the society, whereas the society is not allowing the entry of the petitioner into

the 5th respondent- society and misappropriating the funds given by the Central and State Governments.

4.

If that is so, it is for the competent authority to take appropriate action and the petitioner may bring it to the notice of the competent authority of the alleged misuse of funds. So far as the internal affairs of the society is concerned, as the petitioner is not a member of the society, he cannot have grievance and cannot request the Registrar to look into his grievance by enquiring into the functioning of the 5th respondent - society. On specifically asked by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that there is no bar of forming any number of societies. Further, as per the byelaws, particular procedure is to be followed for extending the benefits of the society.

5.

For the reasons aforesaid, the Writ Petition merits no consideration and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, this order does not come in the way of the petitioner placing before the competent authority the alleged misuse of funds and it is for the competent authority to look into that issue. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date:22.08.2019 KH