NANDKURNAR BHAUSAHEB ZAWARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the Divisional Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Dairy), Nashik Region, Nashik dated 25th January, 2002 annexed at Exh. K and the order passed by the Honourable Minister in Revision No. 2/2002 dated 8-4-2002 annexed at Exh. 0 to this petition.

(2.) In brief, the petitioner's contention is that he is the Chief Promoter of the proposed Parner Taluka Doodh Vyavasaik Va Prakriya Sangh Ltd., Supa, taluka Parner, District Ahemdnagar. Five proposals for formation of Taluka Doodh Sangh were filed before the Divisional Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Dairy), Nashik Region, Nashik (hereinafter referred to as the D.D.R. Nashik). The petitioner Sangh had filed its proposal on 17-12-1997. In view of the Interim order passed by the High Court, the proposals were not screened as the Government's policy decision to establish Taluka Doodh Sangh was subject-matter for adjudication before the High Court. The High Court had finally heard the Writ Petition No. 949/ 1999 wherein the Government Resolution dated 6-1-1990 was under challenge. After hearing all the parties, the High Court passed a common order in Writ Petition No. 949/1999 and in other connected petitions. The High Court had issued certain directions for implementation of the Government policy by an order dated 3rd March, 2000. By virtue of the said order, the D.D.R. Nashik was directed to hear all the pending proposals seeking registration of Taluka Doodh Sangh within a period of two months and thereafter, the State Government was directed to take a policy decision within further period of two months. The petitioner contends that as far as Parner Taluka is concerned, five proposals were filed. They were :-

(3.) The D.D.R. Nashik had submitted the initial feasibility report on 26-4-2000 to the State Government. As the State Government failed to take a policy decision for permitting registration of Taluka Doodh Sangh in Parner Taluka, the respondent No. 5 had filed Writ Petition No. 714/2001 on 13-2-2001 seeking directions from the High Court to grant permission to open Bank account and to collect milk on the basis of the reports submitted by the D.D.R. Nashik on 26-4-2000. The present petitioner was not a party respondent to the said writ petition. The High Court had disposed of the said writ petition with certain directions on 29-3-2001. It was made clear by the I ugh Court in its order in paragraph 4 that the authorities (respondent No. 1 and 3 therein) shall not take anything into consideration, which has happened in the matter of Parner after the date of the report i.e. 26-4-2000. It was directed to the D.D.R. Nashik to issue further orders in accordance with the provisions of law within thirty days from the date of the order. The petitioner contends that all the parties were heard and their evidence was considered in the feasibility report which was submitted to the Government of Maharashtra on 26-4-2000. The D.D.R. Nashik passed an order dated 11-5-2001 granting permission to open bank account and to collect milk in favour of the petitioner's proposed Sangh. The respondent No. 5 had preferred Appeal No. 3/2001 before the Joint Registrar (Dairy), Maharashtra State, Worli, Mumbai (For short, the Joint Registrar). The Joint Registrar had allowed the appeal on 7-6-2001 in favour of the respondent No. 5 Sangh by quashing and setting aside the order passed on 11-5-2001 by the D.D.R. Nashik. The petitioner had thereafter, preferred Revision under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1960). The Honourable Minister (Dairy) had allowed Revision No. 37/2001 and upheld the order passed by the D.D.R. Nashik on 11-5-2001. The order passed by the Joint Registrar was set aside and the petitioner was permitted to open Bank account and collect milk. The respondent No. 5 then preferred Writ Petition No. 2872/2001 being aggrieved by the order passed by the Minister in revision. The writ petition was rejected by a speaking order on 4-8-2001 by this Court. The respondent No. 5 thereafter, filed Letters Patent Appeal to the Division Bench against the order passed by the Single Judge. The said Letters Patent Appeal was bearing No. 59/2001. The Division Bench had disposed of it by an order dated 4-10-2001. The order passed by the D.D.R. Nashik dated 11-5-2001 was set aside by the Division Bench and he was directed to held fresh inquiry as per the directions given by the High Court. The order passed by the Joint Registrar and the Minister were also set aside. The Letters Patent appeal was, therefore, allowed.