1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.8027 OF 2009 Ashok s/o Shravan Patkar ... PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri R.N. Dhorde, Advocate holding for Shri P.S. Dighe, Advocate for the petitioner Shri K.S. Patil, A.G.P. for State Shri V.D. Hon, Advocate holding for Shri D.S. Bagul, Advocate for respondent No.4. ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 6th October, 2010 PER COURT : 1. Heard extensively. The petitioner availed financial facilities for himself and for his wife from respondent No.4, the credit cooperative society. He had controversies with the respondent No.4. There is chequered history of litigation between both. Applications are moved by the petitioner to several authorities inviting action against the misdeeds of respondent No.4. 2. During the course of submissions, Mr. Dighe, the learned counsel informed, the Society has released a loan of Rs. 2 90 Lacs to an institution not eligible to receive such loan. Some facilities are extended to the persons who are not within the jurisdiction of area of the Society. Amount of Rs.40 Lacs is shown as debit as against sanction of Rs.25 Lacs. According to him, all these irregularities pointed on number of occasions, have not been attended to. He reiterates, fresh audit of respondent No.4 Society from the year 2000 is a must on the fact situation. 3. It is a matter of record that the petitioner is a borrower for himself and for his wife, did not comply with the requirements of payment schedule and consequently, matter has landed in making several applications against respondent No.4 and pursuant thereto, time to time survey/enquiries are conducted. Such details of the enquiries are tendered at page No.426 and 427. The enquiries illustrated one of the enquiry was from inception of the society till 2005, directed by Mr. A.K. Chavan, Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nasik. It was carried by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Satana, District Nasik. The other authority which was moved by the applicant was Mr. M.R. More, Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nasik, who too directed enquiry from inception of the respondent No.4 till 2007 and the point of agitation was misappropriation, defalcation of amount worth Rs. 20 Crores by respondent No.4. 3 4. The learned counsel for respondents has invited my attention to the objections raised by the auditor at page Nos. 109, 110 and 111 to indicate that, in spite of opportunities being extended, no such compliances or ratifications are carried. 5. The approach of the petitioner can be branded as a whistle-blower. However, the root cause was apparently he was cornered by the respondent No.4 for the recovery of dues and the respondent No.4 faced brunt of several prosecutions. 6. The matter was taken before the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, who has passed order dated 2.2.2008 (Page 65 and 66 of the Paper Book). The same was subject of challenge by the respondent No.4 before the learned Minister, who has recorded the order dated 4.2.2009. During the course of submissions, Mr. Hon, learned counsel representing respondent No.4 informed, the order dated 4.2.2009, directing the carrying out of audit by Mr. D.B. Chaudhari is complied with and such audit is completed on 7.10.2010. Present petition is filed on 14.10.2009. Taking survey of all above facts, it appears, the grievance has been agitated of challenge to the order dated 4.2.2009 is indeed complied with. The aspect of personal hearing at the time of carrying such audit by Mr. D.B. Chaudhari is not now open. The other aspect of reauditing in the above set of facts need not be questioned. If the society fails to adhere to 4 the statutory rules, the competent authorities are open to take action against it. Writ Petition dismissed. No costs. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/wp802709