:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1387 OF 2007 Renuka Devi Matsaya Vyavasaya Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents WRIT PETITION NO. 6968 OF 2006 Ajinkya Sahakari Machhi Vyavasayayik Sanstha Maryadit ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents --------- Mr.Uday Warunjikar for the petitioners. Ms.P.S.Cardozo for respondent nos.1,2 and 3. Mr.R.V.Govilkar for respondent no.4. :2: :2: :2: CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 17th January, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. The petitioner in W.P.No.1387 of 2007 makes a statement that in pursuance of the order passed by this court on 13.2.2007 in the companion Writ petition the Revision Application preferred before the Minister was not the appropriate remedy. In such circumstances, the petitioner must have an opportunity to challenge the order passed by the Commissioner. The Commissioner has passed an order which is adverse to the petitioner and there is a serious issue of his jurisdiction. In such circumstances, the prayer of the petitioner is that the order passed in Appeal No.1 of 2005 and Appeal No.2 of 2005 on 21.1.2006 be quashed and aside. 2. The matter was adjourned to enable Ms.Cardozo appearing for the respondents to take instructions as to which authority in the State Government will decide the controversy. In other words, the learned AGP to :3: :3: :3: take instructions as to whether any remedy is available to the petitioner to challenge this appellate order. 3. After taking instructions from the concerned officers in the Department of Animal Husbandry Dairy and Fisheries, Government of Maharashtra, Ms.Cardozo makes a statement that the said Government department is the Forum before whom the petitioner can challenge the appellate order. She further states that the Secretary in the said Department would hear the parties and decide the controversy. Accordingly, the matter now be placed before the Secretary in the Department of Animal Husbandry Dairy and Fisheries, Government of Maharashtra and he shall in place of the Minister who did not have the authority and jurisdiction under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, decide as to whether the petitioner has made out a case for quashing and setting aside the order of the Learned Commissioner of Fisheries, Maharashtra State, Mumbai. 4. She states that if parties appear before the Secretary on the date and time stipulated by this court :4: :4: :4: the Secretary would endeavour and dispose off the proceedings expeditiously. Accordingly, the parties are directed to appear before the Secretary in the Department of Animal Husbandry Dairy and Fisheries on 28.1.2008 and he shall endeavour and dispose off the matter by treating the petition in the Writ Petition No.1387 of 2007 as a Revision Application and hear parties on the same. He shall pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the parties. Both the petitions are disposed off. No order as to costs. sd/- ********