1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6791 OF 2009 Dr. Bipinchandra s/o Bapu Chamle, Age 85 years, Occ. Medical Practitioner and Chairman of the Bhagyanagar Sahakari Bhadekaru Malaki Grahnirman Sanstha Ltd., Latur. ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, in the Department of Co-operation, Maharashtra State, Mumbai. 2. The Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Latur. 3. The Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra State, Latur, Taluka and District Latur. 4. The Administrator of the Bhagyanagar Sahakari Bhadekaru Malaki Grahnirman Sanstha Ltd., Latur, Shri S.S. Mali, serving in the office of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Latur. 5. Rajendra s/o Tulshiram Shinde, Age 68 years, Occu. Agri., R/o Vithal Nagar, Latur, Taluka and District Latur. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri A.N. Irpatgire, Advocate for the petitioner Shri V.G. Salunke, A.G.P. for respondents No.1 to 3 Shri S.S. Manale, Advocate for respondent No.5. ..... 2 CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J. DATE : 24th November, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. The order dated 7.8.2009, which is under challenge is an interim order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Latur Division, Latur, in the appeal before the said authority, which appeal is stated to be pending. 2. This Court, by order dated 9.10.2009, had granted rule and interim relief in terms of prayer clause (C), which reads as under : 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. Rule. 3. Interim relief in terms of prayer clause-C which reads as under : "(C) Pending, hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition, the execution, implementation and operation of the order passed by the respondent No.3 on 14.7.2009 U/sec. 78(1) of the MCS Act, 1960 and the order passed by the respondent No.2 on 7.8.2009 in Appeal No.42/2009 rejecting the Stay application filed in appeal, may kindly be stayed." 3. Considering the fact that the order under challenge is only an interim order, in my view, interest of justice would be 3 served by disposing of this petition by issuing the following directions : The Divisional Joint Registrar shall decide the Appeal No.42/2009 pending before him, filed by the present petitioner, within a period of six months from today. During the pendency of the appeal, the interim relief as set out hereinabove granted by this Court in the present petition in terms of prayer clause (C) shall operate. In the event any order which is adverse to the interest of the petitioner is passed, the same shall not be given effect to for a period of 15 days from the date of the communication of the order to the petitioner. 4. With the above directions, the Writ Petition to stand disposed of. Rule made absolute. A.A. SAYED JUDGE