1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 386 OF 2010 THE GONDIA DISTRICT LABOUR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES FEDERATION -: versus :- THE STATE OF MAH. AND OTHERS. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri A.M.Ghare, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri T.R.Kankale, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 to 3. Shri M.V.Samarth, Advocate for Respondents No.4 to 12, 14 to 18. Shri G.G.Bade, Advocate for Resps. No.13, 19,22,23,25,27,28,33 to 38. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : APRIL 26, 2010. 1. Heard Shri Ghare, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Shri Ghare, learned counsel is insisting for interim orders. Shri Samarth, learned counsel, who appears for similarly placed societies, opposes grant of interim relief. Shri Kankale, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 to 3 is also opposing the interim relief. 3. Therefore, I have heard the respective counsel. I find that this Court has on 07.03.2007 in Writ Petition No. 5178 of 2005 directed the respondents to reconsider the entire issue. The communication dated 30.01.2009 sent to the counsel for the petitioner by District Deputy Registrar mentions that the Government had rejected pre-permission for registration of 34 proposals of Labour Cooperative Societies. 2 4. The grievance of Shri Ghare, learned counsel is, after 07.03.2007, the petitioners have not been heard at all in the matter. There is nothing on record to show that such an opportunity was extended to the petitioner. 5. The learned AGP at this stage attempted to point out the circumstances leading to issuance of Government Resolution dated 06.12.2008 by inviting attention to paras 1 and 3 of the reply affidavit. However, there is nothing to explain the stand of DDR in communication dated 30.01.2009 mentioned supra. 6. In these circumstances, I had given two options to parties. The first one is, keeping all issues open, as it is urged that these 34 Labour Cooperative Societies are now already registered, the petitioner should be permitted to challenge those orders by raising all contentions open to him. The other one was to hear this matter at necessary length after vacation and till then no coercive action should be taken against the petitioner. 7. After dictation of this part on 23.04.2010 Shri Samarth, Advocate had accepted to go by option 1. As Advocate Shri Bade was not available matter was adjourned to 26.04.2010. 8. Advocate Shri Bade, today, has adopted arguments of Advocate Shri Samarth and contended that 3 there is a valid No Objection Certificate given by the erstwhile District Labour Federation at Bhandara before its bifurcation. It is not necessary for this Court to look into all this as orders of Division Bench dated 07.03.2007 require State Government to consider all the aspects and seals the same. The appeal filed before the State Government has been rejected on the ground that there are no orders of registration of any society passed on 06.12.2008 and hence, the appeal was against non-existent order. It is apparent that the grievance made by the petitioner, therefore, has not been considered. 9. However, after hearing the respondents it appears that after 06.12.2008 the orders of registration of societies are also passed. Communication dated 30.01.2009 by District Deputy Registrar, Gondia discloses that registration was in contemplation only. The non-fulfillment of policy norms was one of the grievances in Writ Petition No.5178/2005 has not been considered and needs to be examined. In this situation, it will be appropriate to permit the petitioner to challenge those orders before the competent authority in accordance with law. As this Court has given liberty to the petitioners, the adverse orders sought to be taken against the petitioner by respondent No.3 is stayed during pendency of such appeal. The appeal shall be filed by the petitioner before competent authority by 15th May, 2010 with advance copy thereof for all the respondents in writ petition. 4 10. After the appeal is so filed appellate Authority shall decide the appeal in accordance with law keeping in view the directions of the Division Bench of this Court dated 07.03.2007 as early as possible and in any case by 15th June, 2010. 11. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE RR