Maruti B Sasulkar v. State Of Maharashtra And 2 Others

13 wp3025-16 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3025 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr.M.M.Vashi, Sr.Advocate a/w Ms.Aparna Devkar i/b M/s.M.P.Vashi & Associates for the petitioner Mr.Sukanta Karmarkar, A.G.P. for the State Mr.Girish D. Utangale i/b M/s.Utangale and Co. for the respondent no.2 Mr.Makrand Kale for the respondent no.3 CORAM : K. K. TATED, J.

DATE : DECEMBER 21, 2016 P.C.:

Heard.

By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner challenges the order dated 9.9.2016 passed by respondent no.2 under section 78(A)1 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Prayer clause (b) of the petition shows that petitioner already filed Revision application on 4.8.2016 before the appellate authority. Same is pending for hearing on its own merits.

The learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of Mohite 1/2

13 wp3025-16 respondent no.1 after taking instruction from his officer makes a statement that both the Revision applications will be decided according to law within 3 months from today. Statement is accepted. In view of the statement made by the learned A.G.P. for the respondent no.1 State, nothing survives in the Writ Petition.

As efficacious alternate remedy is available to the petitioner and same is already in motion, I do not find any substance in the present Writ Petition to entertain under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Liberty granted to the petitioner to move before the authority in both the Revision applications if they so desire for interim relief and that application be decided on its own merits. Hence, Writ Petition stands disposed of directing authority to decide petitioner's Revision Application within 3 months from the date of production of this order.

JUDGE Mohite 2/2