RAM JADHAV Vs. V S INDULKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the Learned Counsel. Perused previous orders. It appears that on 23rd July, 2008, the Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies, Pune passed an order under section 78 (1) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act superseding the Managing Committee and appointed an Administrator. That order was challenged before the Divisional Joint Registrar Cooperative Societies, Pune who stayed the order passed by the Deputy Registrar. It was interim stay. As a result order about appointment of Administrator came to be stayed. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed Intervention Application.

(2.) ON 10th September, 2008, the Divisional Joint Registrar vacated the interim stay order, result of which would be the appointment of Administrator as per the order passed by the Deputy Registrar. The order dated 10th September, 2008 was challenged in Writ Petition No. 6436/2008. It was contended on behalf of the Petitioners in their Petition, that the order vacating interim relief was in breach of principles of natural justice as Petitioners, who were Appellants before the Divisional Joint Registrar, were not given opportunity of hearing. On 19th September, 2008 this Court in the said Writ Petition stayed the order dated 10th September, 2008 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar. The effect of this order was to revert back to the interim stay granted by the Divisional Joint Registrar to the appointment of the Administrator. Later on 20th November, 2008, this Court directed the parties to maintain statusquo as on 19th September, 2008. It is contended by the Petitioner that the charge of management was already taken over by the Administrator on 10.09.2008 after the interim stay was vacated by the Divisional Joint Registrar. This fact was not disclosed by the Respondents before the Court while filing the Writ Petition No. 6436/2008. As such on 19th September, 2008 when this Court stayed the impugned order dated 10th September, 2008, it was not pointed out to the Court that the Administrator had already taken over the management and by suppressing the fact secured the order dated 19th September, 2008. As on 19th September, 2008 when this Court passed the order, the Administrator was in charge of the management, the order dated 20th November, 2008 directing the parties to maintain statusquo as of 19th September, 2008 would mean that the Administrator would continue to be in management. Inspite of this the Respondents held the Annual General Meeting on 30th December, 2008 and also held election for 3 posts and thus Respondents committed contempt of court by violating the order of statusquo passed by this Court on 20th November, 2008.

(3.) IT may be noted that Appeal No. 48 of 2008 was allowed by the Divisional Joint Registrar by order dated 30th January 2010. That order was challenged by the Petitioner by filing the Revision Application No. 143 of 2010 before the Hon'ble Minister Cooperation, Government of Maharashtra. The Revision Application was allowed by Hon'ble Minister on 22nd July, 2011 and the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar in Appeal was set aside. The order passed by the Deputy Registrar on on 23rd July, 2008 for supersession of the Managing Committee and appointment of the Administrator was thus confirmed.