1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4531 OF 1996 Chief Promotor,Mahatmaphule Adivasi Magaswargiya Machhimar Sahakari Soceity Limited, Jangal tanda, Taluka Soyagaon, District Aurangabad petitioner/ori Respondent versus 1. Jay Bhole Mastya Vyasayik Sahakari Sanstha Limited, Warkhedi, Taluka Soygaon, District Aurangabad,through its Chairman Ashok s/o Sukhdeo Khedkar, 2. Joint Registrar for Co-op. Societies (Dairy) Maharashtra State, Bombay. 3. The Divisional Deputy Registrar, Co-op.Societies (Dairy),Aurangabad. 4. The Assistant Registrar, Respondents/ Co-op .Societies (Dairy), Resp.No.1 ori. Aurangabad. appellant 2 Shri S.K.Shelke, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri R.T.Nagargoje, Advocate, for Respondent No.1. Coram: P.R. Borkar J. Date : August 14, 2009 Oral Judgment 01. This writ petition is filed by the Chief Promotor of the petitioner-society, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), State of Maharashtra, Mumbai, in Revision Application No.24 of 1996 decided on 5.8.1996, whereby he refused registration of the petitioner-society and set aside the order dated 2.4.1996 passed by the Regional/Divisional Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), Aurangabad. 02. Briefly stated, it is the case of present writ petitioner-society that the original revision petitioner and other members of the proposed society were the members of the Jai Bhole Mastya Vyavsayik Co-op. Society Ltd. Warkhedi which is respondent No.1. There were complaints that the revision petitioner and other members of the proposed society were not getting work of fishing, though remaining members of Respondent No.1 were getting the work; accounts were also not submitted by the Chairman and other office bearers of the society and, therefore, the 3 revision petitioner and other members of the proposed society had taken recourse to agitation and hence, the Government officials intervened and a meeting was held on 23.7.1995 in which the Government officials directed that those members of Respondent No.1-society who had complaints should resign from Respondent No.1-society and give proposal for forming new society in respect of fishing tank which was newly constructed at Jangal Tanda by the Irrigation Department. It is stated that in the meeting it was decided that the persons from Jangal Tanda who were desirous of being members, should also be made members and after completion of all paperwork, proposal should also be submitted to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), Aurangabad. 03. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner-proposed society that accordingly it made a proposal for registration of the society which was accepted by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies who granted permission to them to open the bank account and letter to that effect was given to the Petitioner on 30.8.1995 which is annexed as Exhibit B to petition. 04. Being aggrieved by the permission granted by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Respondent No.1 filed appeal No.17 of 1995 to the Regional Deputy Director, Cooperative Societies 4 (Dairy), Aurangabad who dismissed the same on 2.4.1996. Against that dismissal, revision application No.24 of 1996 was filed before the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), and that revision came to be allowed vide order dated 5.8.1996, thereby setting aside the order passed by the Regional/Divisional Deputy Director. The said order dated 5.8.1996 of the Joint Registrar Cooperative Societies (Dairy) is challenged in this petition. 05. Heard Shri S.K.Shelke, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri R.T.Nagargoje, learned Advocate, for the Respondent. Together, both have taken me through entire record. 06. It is argued by Advocate Shri Shelke that no reasons were given by the Joint Registrar while passing the impugned order. Simply arguments advanced before him on behalf of present Respondent No.1 were accepted without any comments thereon. It is also argued that the registration should have been allowed in the light of various documents produced, more particularly the no objection certificate issued by the District Fisheries Development Officer, Aurangabad, dated 11.7.1995 produced at Exhibit A-1 and also in view of permission granted by the Assistant Registrar to open bank account which is produced at Exh. B. 5 07. On the other hand, Advocate Shri R.T. Nagargoje for Respondent No.1 submitted that the proposal by writ petitioner was not as per requirements of the law and there were misrepresentations in the proposal. Thus, it is his contention that as per the letter dated 27.3.1995 produced at Exh.A, persons from Jangal Tanda who were desirous of becoming members should have been made members of the proposed society and he pointed out that out of proposed 25 members, 24 members were from outside Jangal Tada and one who was from Jangal Tanda had also expired on 20.7.1998 and as such, there is no person from Jangal Tanda as a member in the proposed society. For that purpose, Advocate Shri Nagargoje produced two certificates issued by the Gram Panchayat, Jangal Tanda, along with affidavit in reply. Copy of the death certificate is produced on record at the time of arguments. 08. My attention was also drawn to the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.8323 of 2006, the copy of which is produced at R-3 with affidavit in reply. In that case, the Division Bench referred to the circular dated 17.6.1997 and it is observed that availability of fishing tank and having necessary catchment area are the important and relevant considerations for granting registration to fishery society. The norms for granting 6 registration to such society are also produced on record and they are as follows. (a) Minimum annual production of the fish from the registered tank of the proposed society must not be less than 3000 kilograms and it should be ordinarily 6000 kilograms. (b) The area under the tank available throughout the year must be 30 hectares. (c) The jurisdiction of the society should be upto ten kilometers. (d) There must be at least 25 members and initial share capital should be Rs, 1,000/=. 09. In this case, it is not disputed that initially there were 25 members of the society with initial capital of Rs.1,000/=. However, the condition of minimum possible yield of fish is not fulfilled. Learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 has drawn my attention to the letter dated 11.7.1995 from the District Fisheries Development Officer to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies giving no objection in favour of the petitioner society. In the said letter, it is stated that possible yield from tank at Janal Tanda which was 47 hectare in area was 1400 kilograms. Thus, it appears that the possible yield of fish was not 3000 kilogram which is the minimum requirement as per the norms for allotting fishing tank. 7 10. It is also argued before me that permission granted by the Assistant Registrar by his letter dated 30.8.1995 (Exh.B) was only for the period of 45 days and that period was not extended. 11. It is also argued that the tank at Jangal Tanda is not available for proposed society inasmuch as it was already agreed that the said tank shall be with Respondent No.1-society till the period 2010-2011. My attention was drawn to letters dated 9.11.1995, 30.10.1996 and 28.7.2006 produced with reply affidavit. The last letter shows that the contract of fishing from tank at Jangal Tanda was given to Respondent No.1-society from 1.7.2006 to 30.6.2011. Copy of the agreement to that effect dated 4.11.2006 between the Government and Respondent No.1 is produced on record. So, it is submitted that the fishing tank at Jangal Tanda is not available to the writ petitioner and, therefore, in view of judgment of this court referred to above, this petition cannot be allowed. 12. It is also submitted that as per the bye- laws produced with reply affidavit, a member of Respondent No.1-society cannot be a member of any other society at the same time and in the letter which is produced on record, what is stated is 8 that the proposed members of the petitioner- society have agreed to give resignations, but there is nothing on record to show that such resignations have been given on 11.7.1995 when no objection certificate was issued by the District Fisheries Development Officer to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), Aurangabad. 13. In my considered opinion, the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), State of Maharashtra, did not commit any error in allowing the revision and setting aside the order passed by the Regional/Divisional Deputy Director. Hence, Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. It is, however, made clear that subject to availability of tank and fulfillment of other necessary conditions, persons from Soygaon, who are now mainly living members of the petitioner- society, are at liberty to seek fresh registration of the society. pnd/ wp4531.96 (P.R.BORKAR, J.)