Bombay High CourtWP/13281/2019disposed offdismissed for default

Akola Taluka Sahakari Dekhrekh Sangh Maryadit Through Director Prakash Sakharam Deshmukh And Anothe v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

2019-11-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge2 pages

*1* 6wp13281o19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.13281 OF 2019 AKOLE TALUKA SAHAKARI DEKHREKH SANGH MARYADIT THROUGH DIRECTOR AND ANOTHER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for the Petitioners : Shri Kute Rajendra L. AGP for Respondents 1 to 4 : Shri S.W.Munde ...

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :- 18th November, 2019 Per Court:

The petitioners seek to challenge the interlocutory order dated 09.07.2019 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Akole (respondent no.4), by which, he has decided to temporarily take petitioner no.1/ cooperative society into liquidation. The learned advocate for the petitioners has strenuously criticized the impugned order in view of the six grounds formulated in the memo of the petition. Reliance is placed upon some of the interim orders passed by this Court and the judgment delivered at Nagpur Bench in the matter of Chandrapur Zilla Sahakari Krushi and Gramin Bahuudeshiya Development Bank Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2004(3) Bom. C.R. 889.

*2* 6wp13281o19 I find from the record that this writ petition is filed by petitioner no.1/ cooperative society through it's director and in the personal capacity of the director as well. After the order was passed on 09.07.2019, the matter was before respondent no.4 for a hearing. Instead of participating in the said hearing in view of the show cause notice, the petitioners have rushed to this Court when they can effectively canvass all their grounds before respondent no.4 and convince the said authority that the impugned interlocutory order does not deserve to be confirmed and should be vacated.

Considering the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to present their case before respondent no.4 on the nearest approaching date of hearing and canvass all their grounds. Written notes of submissions along with case law are also permitted. After the hearing before respondent no.4 is concluded, the said authority shall proceed to deliver a reasoned order within 21 (twenty one) days from the date of such conclusion of submissions. Needless to state, respondent no.4 would deal with all contentions and objections of all litigating sides.

kps (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)