Government Pleader For R.nos.1

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLAE SIDE Writ Petition No. 4026 of 2007 Lasalgaon Vibhag Sahakari Kharedi Vikri Sangh Ltd. ..Petitioner vs. 1.The Asstt.Registrar Cooperative Societies & Ors. ..Respondents Shri A.S.Desai for petitioner. Shri P.P.Kakade, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1, 2 and 6. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 4th July, 2007 P.C. The petitioner society removed the Managing Committee members on the ground that they had incurred disqualification under Rule 58(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961. That action was subject matter of challenge at the instance of the members and the Asstt.Registrar Cooperative Societies, Niphad, District Nashik has held that the decision of the society is without any authority of law in as much as the concerned persons have not been declared as defaulters. There is no adjudication in that behalf. That order of the Asstt.Registrar was challenged by the Society in Revision Petition No.89 of 2006 and the Divisional Joint Registrar having upheld the same by the impugned order, the petitioner society is before me invoking my writ jurisdiction. The only contention raised by Shri Desai is that the aggrieved persons have no right to approach the Asstt.Registrar in as much as they had the remedy of filing a Dispute under sec.91 before the competent Cooperative Court. That was the only remedy available to them in law. Asstt.Registrar had no jurisdiction to entertain their grievance. Be that as it may, on facts, it has been concurrently observed that the pre-requisite for initiating action has not been satisfied in the present case. In para 11 of the impugned order, the Joint Registrar has observed that C.E.O. of the society issued letter dated 22nd August, 2006 informing the concerned Managing Committee members that they have incurred disqualification under sec.73FF of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Hence, they cease to be the Managing Committee members. It has been observed by the Joint Registrar that powers under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act of removal are vested only with the Registrar and unless action under sec.78 of the Act is initiated there is nothing like an automatic cessation. That no order under sec.78 has been passed is not disputed by Shri Desai. That is settled position in law and reference has been made by both the authorities to the decisions of this Court in that behalf. Having observed that mandatory pre-requisites are not satisfied for invoking the powers to disqualify the Managing Committee Members and to remove them, I do not wish to enter into any larger controversy. More so, when the factual position remains undisputed. As to whether the Asstt.Registrar would have jurisdiction to interfere with the action of disqualification or removal or not is a matter which can be gone into and decided in an appropriate case. That aspect is expressly left open. I am of the view that the findings of fact are not vitiated by any error apparent nor can be termed as perverse. Hence, the writ jurisdiction is not available to the petitioner. Petition is summarily dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.523 OF 2008 Yeshwant Prabhakar Meshram & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. The Hon'ble Registrar, District Court, Chandrapur & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.P.P.Thakare i/b D.D. Fulzele for the petitioners Mr.V.S.Masurkar, G.P. for the respondents CORAM : J.N.PATEL & SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DATED : 25TH JANUARY, 2008 P.C.: Heard. These two petitioners have approached this court seeking a declaration that they are entitled for being considered for the candidature for selection and entitled to appear for the written examination to be held on 27.1.08 for the post of Clerk and Peon respectively on the establishment of District and Sessions Court, Chandrapur and therefore, this court should direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear for the written examination to be held on 27.01.2008. In view of the fact that the examinations are going to be held on 27.01.2008, we called upon the learned G.P. to get instructions from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur. Accordingly, the communication received in respect of both the candidates from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur is placed on record. Copies are furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioners. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned G.P. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are eligible in all respects and qualify for being considered for appointment to the post of Clerk and Peon respectively. 2 The communication received from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in respect of Petitioner, Yashwant Prabhakar Meshram clearly indicates that he has not filled in the required information and therefore, his application form came to be rejected as the advertisement clearly provides for want of complete information, the application form will not be considered and will be rejected. Similarly, in case of Bhimrao Maroti Undirwade, he not only failed to provide the necessary information but also did not calculate his age correctly. Well, the incorrect calculation of age will not make any difference but the other deficiencies are of substantial nature. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances, we find that as the petitioners have failed to furnish the required information which is of substantial nature, for this deficiency the respondent Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur was justified in rejecting their application. As such, the petition is dismissed. 3 The communication received from the Principal, District and Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in respect of the petitioners be retained on record and marked 'X' collectively for identification. ( J.N. PATEL, J ) ( SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J )