1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4328/2011 (RAJENDRA B. AGRAWAL VERSUS ASSTT. REGISTRAR (CO-OP. SOCIETIES & ANOTHER) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Nitin Rode, A.G.P. for the R-1. Shri J.B. Kasat, counsel for the R-2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 28 , 2011 . It appears that the petitioner has directly approached this Court without exhausting the alternate efficacious remedy available to the petitioner under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 on the ground that the order passed by the Assistant Registrar on 02.06.2011 under Section 101 of the Act is violative of the provisions of Rule 86-F of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961. On the aforesaid submission made on 12.09.2011, this Court issued notice of final disposal to the respondents and stayed the impugned order on the condition that the petitioner deposits an amount of Rupees Three Lacs in this Court till the returnable date. Since 50% amount of the recoverable dues are liable to be paid before filing the revision under Section 154 of the Act, this Court had directed the petitioner to deposit the said sum in this Court. However, the petitioner failed to deposit the said amount. This Court rejected C.A.W. No.2531/2011 and observed that the stay 2 granted by this Court on 12.09.2011 would not operate as the petitioner had failed to deposit a sum of Rupees Three Lacs in this Court. The matter was adjourned at the request of the counsel for the petitioner on more than a couple of occasions thereafter and the petitioner has not deposited a sum of Rupees Three Lacs till this date. It prima-facie appears that though it was canvased on behalf of the petitioner on 12.09.2011 that the petitioner had not borrowed any loan from the respondent-Bank, it prima-facie appears on the basis of the documents filed by the respondent-Bank along with the affidavit in reply that the petitioner had indeed sought and obtained the loan from the respondent-Bank. It prima-facie appears that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands. It further appears that the petitioner is directly challenging the recovery certificate dated 02.06.2011 so that he may not be required to deposit 50% of the recoverable dues before the Revisional Authority. In the aforesaid set of facts, this Court is not inclined to exercise the writ jurisdiction as the petitioner has an alternate remedy under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE