Cooperative Debts Effected Investors Action Committee Thr. Its President v. The State Of Mah. Thr. Ministery For Cooperation And ORS

1 10.04.pil.34.12.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 34/2012 (Cooperative Debts Affected Investors Action Committee vs. The State of Maharashtra and others ) .......................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... Mr.S.J.Khandalkar, Advocate for petitioner Mr.D.P.Thakre, Additional Govt. Pleader for respondent-State CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

DATED : 10th April, 2015.

Heard.

By this petition which is registered as Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent nos.1 and 2 to hold an enquiry in respect of the affairs of the societies and take action against the Directors who are responsible for the losses.

Shri D.P.Thakre, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, states that action is being taken against the cooperative societies. It is stated that the Department of Income-Tax has already seized the records of four societies mentioned in the affidavit. It is further stated that the Cooperation Department has initiated a quasi judicial enquiry under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 against the concerned Directors, in order to fix the responsibility on them. It is stated that out of the ten enquiries that are initiated under Section 88 of the Act, the enquiries in respect of four societies are already completed and the enquiry in

2 10.04.pil.34.12. respect of the other societies would also be completed as early as possible.

In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondents and in view of the additional affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the State of Maharashtra through the Department of Cooperation, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. We dispose of the Public Interest Litigation by accepting the statement made on behalf of the respondent no.1 that the enquiry in respect of other societies would also be completed within a reasonable time, Order accordingly. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE sahare