1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6209/2009 Jagdamba Magas Vargiya Matsya Vyavsai Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Hiwarkheda Tq. Kannad, Dist.Aurangabad. Through its Secretary, Harichand s/o Sarichand Chavan Age years, Occ-Fisherman R/o H.No.197, Hiwarkheda Road, Kannad, Dist.Aurangabad. .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra Through its Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairy, Fishery, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 [Copy to be served on Govt.Pleader High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad] 2] The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Fisheries) Taraporwala Aquarium, Charni Road, Marine Drive, Mumbai No.2. 3] The Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy) Aurangabad. 2 4] Hukumchand s/o Trimbak Rathod Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Garada, Tq. Kannad Dist.Aurangabad. 5] Shabbirkhan s/o Mode Khan Pathan Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Garada, Tq. Kannad, Dist.Aurangabad. 6] Ukha s/o Bhila Jadhav Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Hiwarkheda, Tq. Kannad, District Aurangabad. 7] Radhabai Arjun Rathod Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Garada, Tq. Kannad Dist.Aurangabad. 8] Shamrao s/o Bhila Rathod Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Hiwarkheda, Tq. Kannad Dist.Aurangabad 9] Chatru s/o Rewji Rathod Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Garada, Tq. Kannad Dist.Aurangabad 10] Shri Ram S/o Mangu Rathod Age Major, Occ-Agril R/o Garada, Tq. Kannad Dist.Aurangabad 11] Shri Wagh V.K. Ex-Sub Auditor, Now Sub-Auditor Co-op. 3 Societies, Kannad, Dist.Aurangabad. 12] Shri Ranjnikar Ex-Sub Auditor, Coop. Societies (Padum) Now Sub Auditor in the office of the Dist.Special Auditor, Coop. Societies Aurangabad. 13] Special Auditor Cooperative Societies (Pandum) Jafargate, Aurangabad. 14] Ex-District Development of Fisheries Aurangabad, now Assistant Commissioner of Fisheries, Aurangabad. 15] Shri Wakekar Ex-Incharge Assistant Registrar Coop. Societies (Dairy) Jalna C/o Sahakar Khate Karmachari Sahakari Gruh Nirman Sanstha Ambad Road, Near Hanuman Temple Jalna. 16] Chairman, Magas Vargiya Mastya Vyavsai Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Garada, Tq. Kannad Dist.Aurangabad. 17] Regional Deputy Director of Fisheries, Aurangabad Now Deputy Commissioner Fisheries Aurangabad. .. RESPONDENTS .... Shri N.R.Salunke,Adv.for petitioner. 4 Shri B.V.Wagh,AGP for Respondents 1 to 3. Shri S.W.Mundhe,Adv. for Respondent no.4 Shri S.D.Karkare,Adv.for respondents 5 to 7, 9 & 10. Shri A.R.Kawale holding for Shri P.R.Patil,Adv.for Respondent no.16. .... CORAM : R.K.DESHPANDE,J. DATE : 10/8/2010. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1] This Writ Petition challenges the order dated 22/7/2009 passed by the Deputy Registrar ,Cooperative Societies (Fisheries),Maharashtra State, Mumbai, rejecting the Revision Application No.25/08 filed by the petitioner. The only ground raised in this Petition is that the opportunity of hearing was not provided to the petitioner before the order impugned in this Petition was passed. 2] Notice in this matter was issued on 16/9/2009. While issuing notice, following order was passed : “1] Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 to 3, 13, 14, 17 and learned counsel for respondent no.4. 2] By this Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the 5 Constitution of India, the Petitioner is challenging the order dated 22nd July, 2009 passed by Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Fishery), Maharashtra State, Mumbai on application under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 mainly on the ground that without giving hearing, the Authority passed the impugned order. Therefore, the learned A.G.P. is directed to file affidavit in reply explaining whether the hearing was given to the petitioner or not before passing the impugned order dated 22nd July, 2009. S.O. to 30th September, 2009. In mean while, parties are directed to maintain status quo as on today.” 3] In response to the aforesaid order, Shri Mundhe, the learned counsel appears for respondent no.4, whereas Shri Shri S.D.Karkare,Adv. appears for respondents No.5 to 7, 9 & 10 and Shri A.R.Kawale holding for Shri P.R.Patil,Adv. appears for Respondent no.16. Shri Karkare, the learned counsel states that he would file his Vakalatnama today itself. The learned counsels for the parties agree that the matter can be finally disposed of at this stage, as the question involved is only of giving opportunity of hearing by the the Deputy Registrar respondent no.17. Hence Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the Petition is disposed of finally. 6 4] In response to the aforesaid order passed by this Court, an affidavit has been filed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Dairy), Aurangabad. The stand is taken that on 17/7/2009, notices were sent by Speed Post to all the parties intimating the date of hearing as 22/7/2009. It is further stated in the affidavit that inspite of giving notices, the parties remained absent. Alongwith the affidavit, the dispatch register of Speed Post is also annexed. However, there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was actually served with the notice of hearing. In view of this, it is apparent that the order was passed without granting hearing to the petitioner. In fact in earlier round of litigation, at the instance of the present petitioner i.e. Writ Petition No.1187/2009, decided on 22/6/2009, this Court had directed the Deputy Registrar, to decide the Appeal and the parties were directed to maintain status quo. However, it seems that the Appeal is decided without hearing the petitioner. Hence, the order impugned cannot be sustained. 5] In the result, the instant Writ Petition is allowed. The order dated 22/7/2009 passed by the Deputy Registrar ,Cooperative Societies (Fisheries) Maharashtra State, Mumbai, is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the said authority, for decision of Revision Application No.25/08 afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the parties 7 concerned. The parties shall appear before the Deputy Registrar on 31st August 2010, on which date, the Deputy Registrar shall fix the date of hearing in presence of all the parties and shall decide the matter within a period of 2 months thereafter. In view of the earlier order of status quo, the same shall continue pending the decision of the Appeal. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to costs. [R. K. DESHPANDE, J.] umg/wp6209-09