1 ndm 82 wp.8349.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8349 OF 2010 Kadamgiri Complex Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. The Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies and ors. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. N.N.Bhadrashete for the Petitioner. Ms. Aparna Vatkar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Prashant Naik for Respondent No.3. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 7th December, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for 3rd respondent and the learned AGP appearing for 1st and 2nd respondents. 2 Considering the narrow controversy involved, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3 The challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 6th August, 2010 passed by Divisional Joint Registrar of Co- operative Societies in a Revision application filed by the Petitioner. The challenge in the revision application was to an order passed under Section 25 (A) of the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to “as the 2 said Act”). 4 The first submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner is that in the revision application preferred by the Petitioner, an application for grant of interim relief was moved and the arguments were heard on the issue of grant of interim relief. However, the Divisional Joint Registrar has decided the revision application and has dismissed the same. The learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent submitted that by recording cogent reasons, the revision application has been dismissed and therefore, no interference is called for. 5 This Court had called for the record of the revision application. The roznama shows that on 27th July, 2010, the advocate appearing for the parties were heard on interim relief and the application was closed for passing order. Thus, the roznama indicates that the parties were heard only on the prayer for interim relief. The revision application was never fixed for final disposal. Hence, the impugned order will have to be set aside only on the ground that the revision application was not heard on merits. 6 Hence, I pass following order : i. The impugned order dated 6th August, 2010 is quashed and set aside and the revision application No.218 of 2010 is restored to the file of the Divisional Joint Registrar. ii. The parties are directed to appear before the 3 Divisional Joint Registrar on 22nd December, 2010 at 11:00 a.m. only for the purposes of fixing the date of hearing. The Divisional Joint Registrar shall decide the revision application on merits as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of appearance. iii. Till the disposal of the revision application, ad- interim relief granted by this Court on 26th October, 2010 will continued to operate. iv. Writ petition is disposed of on the above terms by keeping all the contentions of the parties on merits of the revision application open. [ A.S.OKA, J ]