NAINESH SANGHVI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions raise common issues of fact and law. It is therefore appropriate to decide them together by a common judgment.

(2.) These petitions arise from proceedings initiated under Sec. 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The core issue that calls for determination is limited but important. It is whether an Authorised Officer who stands replaced by another officer, after the proceedings under Sec. 88 have been closed for preparation of the report due to complaints of denial of hearing, can still submit a report only because he claims that he was unaware of the order of his substitution. The answer to this issue goes to the legality of the proceedings themselves.

(3.) The relevant facts are stated hereafter for clarity.