IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 1369 OF 1996 WRIT PETITION NO. 1369 OF 1996 WRIT PETITION NO. 1369 OF 1996 Chairman, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Dudh Vyavsaik Sahakari Sanstha. ... Petitioner. V/s. Shri Maruti Ramdas Kachare and others. ... Respondents. M.R.Katikar for the petitioner. Pankaj Das with Rajesh S. Datar for respondent No.1. A.I.Patel, AGP for the State. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 11th August 2008. DATED: 11th August 2008. DATED: 11th August 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- . This petition is directed against the order dated 28th September, 1995 dismissing the revision filed by the present petitioner and thereby confirming the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar dated 19th May, 1994 whereby revision application preferred by the petitioner was dismissed. 2. The petitioner- society is registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and the main business of the society is to collect milk from its members from village- Pimpalkhunte, taluka- Madha, district- Solapur. The petitioner- society has been operating since last many years. The respondent No.1 is a proposed society and has submitted proposal to the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Dairy), Solapur for the registration of the society in respect of Devkar Vasti from village- Pimpalkhunte, taluka- Madha, district- Solapur. 3. This application was opposed by the petitioner- society contending that two operating societies are in existence in village- Pimpalkhunte and if respondent No.1- society is allowed to be registered, there would be shortage of supply of milk. The said application was allowed and the Assistant Registrar permitted respondent No.1- society to open account with the Bank to collect milk from the village- Devkar Vasti. 4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Assistant Registrar, petitioner preferred appeal No.79/1993 before the Divisional Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Dairy), who, vide his order dated 12th November, 1993, allowed the said appeal and set aside the order dated 21st August, 1993. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 21st August, 1993, revision was preferred by the respondent No.1 before the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Dairy), who, vide his order dated 19th May, 1994 allowed the said revision, set - 3 - aside the order of the Divisional Deputy Registrar dated 12th November, 1993 and maintained the order of the Assistant Registrar dated 21st August, 1993. The second revision was preferred by the petitioner before the State Minister (Dairy) against the aforesaid order dated 19th May, 1994 came to be dismissed. 5. The petitioner has, therefore, invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 6. While granting rule, this Court was pleased to grant interim relief in terms of prayer clause (e) vide order dated 4th March, 1996. Since then, the respondent No.1 is prevented from opening account with the bank and collect milk. Almost 12 years have passed. The interim relief has been operating against respondent No.1- society. With the result, respondent No.1- society could not operate and collect or supply milk. The petitioner has produced certificate on record dated 29th October, 1995 issued by the Village Development Officer, Pimpalkhunte certifying therein that there is no area in the name of "Devkar Vasti" in the village- Pimpalkhunte, taluka- Madha. In this view of the matter, petitioner submits that the - 4 - application of respondent No.1 was wrongly granted by the Assistant Registrar and it was rightly rejected by the Divisional Deputy Registrar. He further submits that the order of the learned Minister (Dairy) is based on extraneous consideration and no reasons are to be found in support of the order. As against this, the order passed by the appellate authority is a reasoned order. 7. A finding of fact is recorded by the Divisional Deputy Registrar that there is no area by name "Devkar Vasti". Two societies are already operating in the village- Pimpalkhunte and if the third society is allowed to operate then it will generate unnecessary competition and the respondent No.1- society will not be able to collect more than 80 to 100 litres of milk. This aspect of the matter was not at all considered by revisional authorities. The figures reproduced in the impugned order have no foundation. One fails to understand from where these figures were brought and incorporated in the impugned orders. The impugned orders, therefore, are unsustainable and based on extraneous material which is not on record. The impugned orders of the revisional authorities are, therefore, quashed and set - 5 - aside. The order of the Divisional Deputy Registrar dated 12th November, 1993 is restored. The application for registration made by respondent No.1 before the Assistant Registrar stands rejected. 8. Needless to mention that in the event the respondent No.1 decides to move fresh application in view of change in circumstances, since twelve years have already passed from the date of first application, it would be open for respondent No.3 to consider the said application afresh without getting influenced by the impugned order. 9. Petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of this order with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, (V.C.DAGA, (V.C.DAGA, J.) J.) J.)