1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5766 OF 2009 Hanmansingh Gangaramsingh Chhanwal, R/o­Ghatnandur, Tq­Ambajogai, Dist­Beed. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) Assistant Registrar, Co­operative Societies, Ambajogai, Dist­Beed, 2) Special Recovery Officer, Through ­ Dindayal Nagari Sahakari Bank, Ambajogai, Main office at Prashant Nagar, Ambajogai, Dist­Beed, 3) Dindayal Nagari Sahakari Bank Ambajogai, Main office at Prashant Nagar, Ambajogai, Dist­Beed, (Through its Manager), 4) Quareshi Shanoor Imamsab, R/o­Mutton Shop, Main Road, At Post­Ghatnandur, Tq­Ambajogai, Dist­Beed, 5) Executive Engineer, Majalgaon Project Division, Kesapur Vasahat, Majalgaon, Dist­Beed, 6) State Bank of Hyderabad, Branch Shivaji Chowk, Ambajogai, Dist­Beed. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 ... Mrs. Vaishali Patil Jadhav Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.N.H. Borade, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 5. Mr.H.A. Joshi Advocate h/f. Mr. Pradeep Deshmukh Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3. Mrs. M.D. Thube­Mhase Advocate for Respondent No.4. ... CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE : 30TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner / Guarantor challenges the order passed by the Special Recovery Officer, Ambajogai dated 15th June, 2009 attaching Petitioner's pension under Section 107 of the Maharashtra Co­operative Societies Act, 1960. It is the case of the Petitioner that Respondent No.4 borrowed a sum of Rs.15,000/­ from Respondent No.3 Bank and he stood guarantor. Thereafter the Respondent No.3 Bank filed application under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co­operative Societies Act, 1960 for recovery of sum of 3 Rs.20,136/­ as on 31st December, 2008. Pursuant to the said application, Special Recovery Officer issued certificate under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co­ operative Societies Act, 1960 for the sum of Rs.13,278/­ on 2nd March, 2009. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that instead of recovering the said amount from the original borrower, the Respondent No.3 Bank attached Petitioner's pension against the recovery of the said amount. 3. Respondent No.3 Bank filed their purshis dated 29th September, 2009 duly verified by Special Recovery Officer stating that they have already recovered the entire amount as per recovery certificate, except the legal charges to the tune of Rs.10,000/­. 4. In view of the purshis dated 29th September, 2009, it is not necessary to narrate the entire facts and circumstances of the present case. In view of the purshis dated 29th September, 2009 filed by the Respondent No.3, as the entire loan amount for which the attachment was levied on the pension amount, has been recovered, the attachment ceases and no more deduction 4 can be made from the pension of the Petitioner. With this clarification, nothing survives in this Writ Petition. Hence it is accordingly disposed off. Liberty granted to the Petitioner to take appropriate steps against Respondent No.3 Bank if he so desires. [K.K. TATED, J.] asb/SEPT09/wp5766.09