1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No.8696 Of 2009 With Civil Application No.1153 Of 2010 * Prakashchand s/o Shantilal Jain Age 52 Years, Occupation: Grocery Shop, R/o Near Civil Hospital, Dikshitwadi, Jalgaon, Taluka and District Jalgaon. .. Petitioner Versus 1) The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Cooperation Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. 2) The Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nashik Division, Nashik. 3) The Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jalgaon, Taluka Jalgaon, District Jalgaon. 4) Godavari Laxmi Co-op. Bank Ltd., Jalgaon, R/o 31, Navi Path, Jalgaon, Taluka and District Jalgaon Through its Manager. 2 5) Godavari Laxmi Co-op. Bank Ltd. Jalgaon, R/o 31, Navi Path, Jalgaon, Taluka and District Jalgaon, Through its Special Recovery Officer. .. Respondents. -------- Shri. Ajay G. Talhar, Advocates for petitioner. Shri. V.D. Godbharale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Shri. S.S. Deve, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5. ------- CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE: 3rd MARCH 2010 PER COURT : 1) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of the counsel taken up for hearing. 3) This petition essentially takes exception to the order passed by the Divisional 3 Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nashik Division, Nashik dated 11th December 2009 in Revision Application No.R Nil of 2009. The said revision application has been dismissed solely on the ground that the requirement of pre- deposit of 50% amount in terms of Section 154(2A) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act 1960 has not been complied. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was not challenging the recovery certificate as such which fact is clear from the relief claimed in the revision application itself which reads : “(A)This Revision petition may kindly be allowed. (B) Record and proceedings of this case be called for. (C) By appropriate order or direction the impugned public notice published in daily Deshdoot, dtd.24-11-2009 by the respondent No.2 may kindly be quashed and set aside. 4 (D) By appropriate order or direction the effect and execution of the public notice published in daily Deshdoot, dtd.24-11-2009 by the respondent No.2 may kindly be stayed till final disposal of the present petition. (E) Any other suitable and equitable orders may kindly be passed in favour of the present petitioner.” 4) Even before this Court the petitioner through counsel has conceded that the petitioner would not challenge the recovery certificate at all. The attempt of the petitioner was only to question the procedure followed by the authority to effectuate the said recovery certificate and not challenging the recovery certificate as such. We accept this statement of the petitioner. If so, Section 154(2A) has no application to the case on hand. 5) Understood thus, the order passed by the revisional authority will have to be set 5 aside and in stead the revision application to be restored to the file to its original number to be decided by the revisional authority on its own merit in accordance with law. 6) The revision application be decided as expeditiously as possible preferably within four weeks from today. The petitioner shall appear before the revisional authority on 12th of March 2010 at 11.00 a.m. on which date the revisional authority may indicate the schedule for hearing of the revision application. All questions will have to be decided on its own merits in the said revision application. 7) In view of disposal of this writ petition, the interim order passed on 23rd December 2009 shall stand vacated as the petitioner has conceded before us through counsel that the petitioner is not challenging the recovery certificate at all. The 6 revisional authority shall ensure that the matter is not precipitated till the revision application is finally disposed of one way or the other. The petitioner undertakes that he shall extend full cooperation to the revisional authority for early disposal of the revision application and also further undertakes that he shall not seek any adjournment on any count on the date of hearing assigned by the revisional authority. 8) Rule made absolute in the above terms. 9) Civil Application No.1153 of 2010 does not survive, it stands disposed of. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.) rsl/ wp.8696.09