(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 10990 OF 2010 Badri s/o. Narhari Shinde, Age : 49 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Harischandra Pimpri, Taluka : Wadwani, Dist. Beed. .. Petitioner versus 1. The State of Maharashtra (Through the Secretary, Department of Cooperation, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32) 2. The Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Latur Division, Latur. 3. The District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Beed, Taluka & District : Beed. 4. The Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Wadwani, Taluka : Wadwani, District : Beed. (2) 5. Seva Sahakari Society Ltd., Harischandra Pimpri, Taluka : Wadwani, District : Beed, Through its alleged Chairman, Shri Sukhdeo Sopanrao Shinde, Age : 50 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Harischandra Pimpri, Taluka : Wadwani, District : Beed. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. K.J. Suryawanshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mrs. V.A. Shinde, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 4. Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate, for respondent no.5/ caveator. ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 28TH MARCH 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Adv. Mr. K.J. Suryawanshi, for the petitioner; learned AGP Mrs. V.A. Shinde, for respondent nos.1 to 4, and Adv. Mr. V.D. Salunke, for respondent no.5 / caveator. (3) 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent. 3. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 17-8-2010, passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Latur, in Revision Petition No. 6/2010, thereby allowing the revision filed by respondent no.5, under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (For short, "1960 Act"). By the impugned order, order dated 23-12-2009 passed by respondent no.4 is set aside and the said respondent is directed to decide the application of the petitioner dated 30-9-2009 afresh, after hearing all concerned parties. 4. Adv. Mr. K.J. Suryawanshi contends that application dated 30-9-2009 moved by the petitioner in relation to removal of 153 members was inquired into by the Assistant Registrar and names of 77 members were directed to be deleted. In revision filed by respondent no.5 / Society, Divisional Joint Registrar has remanded matter back for holding fresh inquiry. According to him, the inquiry has to be under Section 11 of 1960 Act and not under Section 25A thereof. He further states that the petitioner will be satisfied if inquiry in relation to 77 persons found to be ineligible by Assistant Registrar is directed to be conducted (4) under Section 11 in time bound manner. 5. Learned AGP Mrs. V.A. Shinde, for respondent nos.1 to 4, as also, Adv. Mr. V.D. Salunke, for respondent no.5, have opposed the petition. They pointed out that application itself was filed before respondent no.3 / District Deputy Registrar. It is further contended that grievance originally was in relation to 153 members and neither those 153 members nor the so called ineligible members were heard by any of the authorities. 6. After hearing respective Counsel, I find that though petitioner moved application before respondent no.3, it was sent by respondent no.3 to respondent no.4 and respondent no.4 has passed orders under Section 25A of 1960 Act. He did not give any opportunity of hearing to 77 members found not eligible for grant of membership by him. That order has been interfered with by the revisional authority and matter has been sent back. 7. It is apparent that so called 77 members found not eligible for grant of membership need to be heard and that inquiry is contemplated under Section 11 of 1960 Act. 8. In the result, the petition is partly allowed. (5) (i) Respondent no.4 / Assistant Registrar is directed to decide the application dated 30-9-2009 moved by the petitioner afresh, only in relation to 77 persons found ineligible by him, after conducting proper inquiry. In the inquiry, Assistant Registrar shall give opportunity of hearing to those 77 persons and thereafter pass appropriate orders. Needless to mention, that the Assistant Registrar shall decide the said application uninfluenced by his earlier orders holding those persons not eligible for grant of membership. (ii) As application was moved on 30th September 2009 and is pending since long, respondent no.4 / Assistant Registrar shall attempt to conclude the proceedings as early as possible and in any case, by 30th June 2011. (iii) Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp10990