← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4881/2022disposed off

Shikshak Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd. Thr Its Secretary Babasaheb Sitaram Patil v. The Divisional Joint Registrar And Others

2025-12-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice Siddheshwar Sundarrao Thombre2 pages

986wp4881.22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 986 WRIT PETITION NO. 4881 OF 2022 SHIKSHAK SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD. THR ITS SECRETARY BABASAHEB SITARAM PATIL

VERSUS

THE DIVISIONAL JOINT REGISTRAR AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Ghatol Patil Shahaji B. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3/State : Mr. V.S.Badakh ...

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.

DATE : 17.12.2025 PER COURT :

1.

Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2.

By way of the present petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 27.08.2021 passed respondent No.1- the Divisional Joint Registrar, Aurangabad in appeal No. 2 of 2021, whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed, thereby confirming the order dated 12.10.2020 passed by respondent No. 2 - the District Deputy Registrar, Parbhani. The petitioner also assails the communication dated 01.01.2021 passed by respondent No. 3 - Authorized Inquiry Officer. 3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Ghatol Patil, submits that the present petition is filed against the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Aurangabad. During the pendency of appeal there was status-quo operating in favour of the petitioner. The appeal came to be dismissed and petitioner has filed Revision before the State

986wp4881.22 Government under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. Though the stay application was filed before the State Government, it was not decided till date. Therefore, this Court vide its order dated 29.04.2022 continued the status-quo granted by the Divisional Joint Registrar.

4.

Learned AGP for the respondent State Mr. Badakh, would submit that by maintaining interim order passed by this Court the purpose would be served, if, this Court directs respondent No.5 to decide the Revision within a period of six months.

5.

In view thereof, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondent No. 5 to decide the Revision within a period of six months from today.

6.

Interim order dated 29.04.2022 passed by this Court to continue till the respondent No. 5 decides the matter on its own merits. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) mahajansb/