KAMAKSHIDEVI MATSYAPALAN SAHAKARI SANSTHA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Advocate for the parties. Perused the order dated 25/10/2005. The impugned order reads thus; "Heard. Rule returnable early. From the impugned order as also from the reply filed by R.No.4-Assistant Registrar, Dairy, it is apparent that as the present respondent No.6 did not submit the proposal and permission given to them by order dt. 19/5/03 was cancelled. This cancellation order has not been challenged by the R.No.6 at any point of time. Hence, interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c)."

(2.) THOUGH the impugned order is sought to be challenged on various grounds, the first point which arises is whether the impugned order is a judgment within the meaning of the said expression under Letters Patent.

(3.) THE impugned order discloses that it merely grants an interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) of the petition. The prayer clause (c) of the petition is for staying the effect and operation of the order dated 23/8/2004 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Fisheries), Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra State, Bandra, Mumbai and the order dated 09/3/2005 passed by the Honourable Minister for State, Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries, Mantralaya, Mumbai to the extent it allowed the registration of the appellant's society. By the said order dated 23/8/2004 while allowing the appeal filed by the appellant, the claim of respondent No.6 for registration of the society was rejected and under the order dated 09/3/2005, the application filed by the appellant as well respondent No.6 were allowed to register their societies.