: 1 : wp.3909.2011.sxw vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3909 OF 2011 Jawahar Nagri Sah. Patsanstha Mydt., Rukdi, Kolhapur & anr. ... Petitioners V/s. Manohar Nana Kamble & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Amit Borkar for the Petitioners Mr.P.D. Dalvi for Resp. No.1 Ms.M.S. Bane, AGP, for the Respondent No.6 CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE: JULY 1, 2011. P.C.: 1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 11.3.2011 in revision application No.200 of 2009. The Divisional Joint Registrar in this revision application has set aside the attachment levied on the property of Respondent No.1. For the purposes of the present petition, it is not necessary to hear Respondent Nos.2 and 3 and their names are deleted from the array of parties. 2. After hearing both sides what I notice is that an attachment order was passed on 9.1.2009 a copy of which is annexed as annexure B to the petition. That was an order of the Special Recovery Officer attached to Petitioner No.1 : 2 : wp.3909.2011.sxw society. Petitioner No.2 is this Special Recovery Officer. Instead of approaching this Special Recovery Officer and requesting him to raise the attachment by pointing out that the same has been wrongfully levied, Respondent No.1 approached the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur by filing the revision application. 3. After hearing both sides at some length and bringing to their notice that the revision application itself could not be filed as that was not the remedy of Respondent No.1, Mr.Dalvi, appearing for Respondent No.1, in all fairness states that Respondent No.1 will approach the competent authority and request it to raise this attachment. It is conceded that the matter could not have been taken in revision before the Divisional Joint Registrar. On this short ground alone, the impugned order is set aside. The challenge to the attachment notice/order dated 9.1.2009 will now be heard by Respondent No.4 Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Hatkanangle, District Kolhapur. He shall treat the memo of the revision application copy of which is at annexure C to the petition as an objection to the attachment notice / order dated 9.1.2009 and pass an appropriate order after hearing both sides in accordance with law. Both sides can produce documents to support their case. 4. Needless to state that these objections are directed to be heard by Respondent No.4 because it has been rightly pointed out to me that the Special Recovery Officer is a party petitioner to this Petition and having levied the attachment himself, it is not expected that he would take a balanced and : 3 : wp.3909.2011.sxw impartial view of the proceedings. In these peculiar circumstances of the case so also without creating any precedent in future cases, the objections shall be heard by Respondent No.4 Deputy Registrar. Both the petitioners as also Respondent No.1 agree that they will not raise any objection to the competence and jurisdiction of the District Deputy Registrar. He shall now hear the parties and pass orders afresh within a period of four weeks from the date of appearance of parties. Both sides agree that they will appear before him on 12.7.2011 at 10.30 am. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions and each one of them are kept open. 5. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)