-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7221 OF 2010 Sou. Rajilaxmi Ranjitsinh Yadav & Anr. ..Petitioners. Versus Divisional Jt. Registrar Co-op. Societies, Kolhapur Division & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Chetan G. Patil for the petitioners. Ms. P. S. Cardozo, AGP for R-1 & 2. Mr. Sameer S. Tambekar for R-3. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : April 28, 2011. P. C. : 1. The petition pertains to the proceedings under section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Respondent no. 3 initiated the proceedings under section 101 against the petitioner before respondent no.2 – Dy. Registrar. Dy. Registrar by his order dated 3rd June 2007 granted recovery certificate against the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the said recovery certificate was granted ex-parte and without issuing any notice to her. Respondent no.3-bank, however, denied this fact. The petitioner thereafter preferred an application for setting aside the ex-parte order passed under section 101 of the M.C.S. Act, 1960. Respondent no.2 thereafter by his order dated 22nd February srp -: 2 :- 2008 stayed the recovery certificate dated 13th June 2006 and directed the parties to remain present for fresh hearing. This order was challenged by filing revision before respondent no.1. The said revision was allowed and therefore the present writ petition. 2. The order passed by respondent no.2 directing fresh hearing on the application under section 101 was set aside on the ground that the Deputy Registrar is not empowered to review his own orders. I do not find any error in the said order in the light of unreported judgment of this court in Writ Petition No. 5349 of 2008 dated 30th August 2008. Learned Single Judge has considered the guidelines issued by the Government and also the provisions of Chapter-VIII-A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961. It was held that in the absence of any specific provision in Chapter – VIII-A, the authority passing an order under section 101, is not entitled to review its own orders. In these circumstances, I do not find any merit in the petition and same is, therefore dismissed. (RANJIT MORE, J.)