1 wp8633-35,43 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8633 OF 2010 Pooja Annasaheb Jadhav through Power of Attorney holder Annaso Sidhanath Jadhav ...Petitioner vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur and others ...Respondents WRIT PETITION NO.8635 OF 2010 Annasaheb Sidhanath Jadhav ...Petitioner vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur and others ...Respondents WRIT PETITION NO.8643 OF 2010 Nandkumar Siddhanath Jadhav through Power of Attorney Holder Annaso Sidhanath Jadhav ...Petitioner vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur, and others ...Respondents Mr.G.S.Godbole i/b Mr.Viond Jadhav for the petitioner in all the petitions Mr.P.D.Dalvi for the respondent no.3 in all the petitions Mr.S.N.Bhosale, A.G.P for respondent nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.8633 of 2010 Ms Aparna Vhatkar, A.G.P for respondent nos.1 and 2 in W.P.Nos.8635 and 8642 of 2010 CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE :DECEMBER 23,2010 P.C.: 2 wp8633-35,43 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the third respondent. 2 On 26th October 2010, the petitions were heard for admission. In paragraphs 3 and 4 of the order passed on that date, this Court has observed thus : 3 Sub section 2-A of section 154 is held to be valid and mandatory. After having availed of the remedy of revision application and after failing to comply with the mandatory requirement of the statute, the petitioner is not entitled to any ad-interim relief without compliance with the requirement of the statute. 4 Only relief which can be granted to the petitioner is of grant of time to comply with the requirement of section 154 (2-A). Hence, petition to come up on scheduled date that is 18th November 2010. Time is granted till then to comply with the requirement of sub section 2-A of section 154 of the said Act. To enable the petitioner to comply with the said requirement, till next date, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner on the basis of the recovery certificate. 3 In writ petition no.8633 of 2010, the constituted attorney of the petitioner has filed an affidavit. It is pointed out that the petitioners in these three petitions have deposited the total amount of Rs.8,00,000/- in this Court in terms of the order passed in earlier writ petition nos.1996,1964 and 1963 of 2008. It is stated that the said amount of Rs.8,00,000/- be appropriated towards 50% amount in terms of sub-section 2A of section 3 wp8633-35,43 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act,1960 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) payable by the petitioner in writ petition no.8633 of 2010. It is stated that the balance amount constituting 50% of the amount payable under the recovery certificate issued against the petitioner in writ petition no.8633 of 2010 will be deposited within a period of three weeks. There are identical affidavits filed by the said constituted attorney Annasaheb Jadhav who is the petitioner in W.P.no.8635 of 2010 and who is the constituted attorney of the petitioner in writ petition no. 8643 of 2010. In other two petitions, the statement which is made in the affidavit is that the petitioners want to withdraw the said two petitions with liberty to apply for revival of the revision applications after complying with the requirement of sub-section 2(A) of section 154 of the said Act. 4 Thus, the petitioners in writ petition nos.8635 and 8643 of 2010 have no objection if their share in the sum of Rs.8,00,000/- already deposited in this Court in earlier petitions is appropriated towards 50% amount payable in accordance with sub-section 2(A) of section 154 of the said Act by the petitioner in writ petition no.8633 of 2010. Time of three weeks is sought in writ petition no.8633 of 2010 to deposit the balance amount constituting 50% of the amount. 5 The learned counsel for the contesting respondent no.3 opposes the prayer for grant liberty to the petitioner in writ petition no.8635 and 8643 of 2010 to apply for revival of the revision applications. On instructions, he stated that the third respondent may not have any objection if the share of the petitioners in writ petition nos.8635 and 8643 of 2010 in the sum of Rs. 4 wp8633-35,43 8,00,000/- is appropriated towards 50% amount payable by the petitioner in writ petition no.8633 of 2010. 6 While passing the order dated 26th October 2010, this Court has granted time to the petitioners only with a view to enable them to comply with the requirements of sub-section 2 (A) of section 154 of the said Act. Therefore, request made by the petitioner deserves to be accepted by granting reasonable time. 7 In view of the aforesaid discussion and affidavits on record, I pass the following order : i) It will be open for the third respondent to withdraw a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- in terms of the order dated 29th September 2010 passed in civil application no. 1844 of 2010 in writ petition no.1963 of 2010. ii)After withdrawal of the said amount, the third respondent will treat the said amount as deposit made by the petitioner in writ petition no.8633 of 2010 in terms of the sub-section 2(A) of section 154 of the said Act. iii)The petitioner in writ petition no.8633 of 2010 is granted time of three weeks from today to deposit with the third respondent the balance amount payable for making compliance with the requirements of sub- section 2(A)of section 154 of the said Act. It is made clear that the compliance of sub-section 2(A) of section 154 will have to made by depositing 50% of the total amount of recoverable dues on the basis of the recovery certificate under challenge payable on the date of filing the revision application. iv)If compliance is made by depositing the balance amount with the third respondent within a period of three weeks from today, the impugned order in writ 5 wp8633-35,43 petition no.8633 of 2010 will stand set aside and the revision application shall stand restored which shall be disposed of by the Divisional Joint Registrar in accordance with law. v) If compliance is not made within stipulated period, the impugned order in W.P.no.8633 of 2010 will stand. vi)Writ petition nos.8635 and 8643 of 2010 stand dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners therein to apply for revival of the revisional applications provided compliance is made with the requirements of sub section 2(A) of section 154 of the said Act within a period of twelve weeks from today. vii)It is made clear that ad-interim relief granted in writ petition nos.8633 and 8643 of 2010 is not extended and the third respondent is free to execute the recovery certificates subject matter of the said petitions. viii)It is obvious that the deposit of the amount in terms of the sub section 2(A) of section 154 will be subject to final outcome of the revision applications. ix)Civil applications Nos.2994, 2992 and 2995 of 2010 do not survive and the same are disposed of. JUDGE