1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.8718 OF 2009. Abdul Kalekh Mohammad Musa and others ... Petitioners. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.P.D.Suryawanshi, advocate holding for Mr.D.N.Suryawanshi, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 19.03.2010. PER COURT 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order 2 passed by the Respondents dated 30.1.2009, superseding the Board of the Respondent No.5 Bank. The petitioner also alternatively prays that directions be issued for holding of elections. 2. We have heard Shri Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the petitioner with whose assistance we have perused the order impugned in the present petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner also points out various provisions for supersession of the Board, namely, Section 107 and other relevant Sections. From perusal of the impugned order and the other documents, it transpires that the Respondents have followed the procedure and no flaw can be pointed out in the procedure followed. 3. In that light of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere in the petition. Unfortunately, Administrative Committee has been appointed after supersession of the Board, no directions can be held for elections. 3 4. Mr.Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the petitioner raises a serious grievance that the Administrative Committee is not looking after the interest of the Bank. Leave is granted to the petitioner to avail the remedies available to ventilate the grievance raised by the petitioner in this behalf. The petitioner may avail remedy to the competent authorities complaining of the lack of interest shown by the Administrative Committee for the recovery of the dues. 5. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (P.V.HARDAS,J.) asp/office/wp8718.09