1 1164.11-wp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1164 OF 2011 Shri Kashiram Laxman Nikam & ors. ... Petitioner. V/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents. R.R.Mishra for the petitioners. S.N.Bhosale, AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3. L.H.Patil for respondent Nos.4 to 8. CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. DATED : 11th April 2011. P.C. : Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. The Administrator under section 78 of the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 has been appointed by respondent No.3, the Assistant Registrar on the petitioner No.9- Society vide his order dated 20th March, 2010. This order is confirmed by respondent No.2, the Divisional Joint Registrar in appeal under section 152 of the said Act. The said order is challenged by the petitioners in this petition. 3. Mr.Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 8 submits that the petition is not maintainable in as much as the petitioners have alternative efficacious remedy under section 154 of the Act before the State of Maharashtra. Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submits that the impugned orders are passed at the instance of local political leader and, therefore, the petitioners may not get justice before the revisional authority. The reason given by the petitioners for bypassing the remedy of sanjay 2 1164.11-wp revision, in my view, is not sufficient. No specific allegations against the specific persons are made. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the present petition is not maintainable. 4. Faced with the above situation, Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach revisional authority. Mr.Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 8 submits that the respondents will not oppose the revision application on the ground of delay in as much as the petitioners were prosecuting the proceeding in good faith before this Court. 5. In the result, leave to withdraw this petition is granted with liberty to the petitioners to file revision application before the revisional authority. In case the petitioners file revision within four weeks from today, the same shall be disposed of on merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of filing thereof. 6. So far as interim order is concerned, though the Administrator was initially appointed in the month of of March, 2010, this order was stayed from time to time either by the appellate authority or by this Court. Therefore, during the pendency of the final decision of the revision application, the order appointing Administrator dated 20th March 2010 shall remain stayed. In case the final order of the revisional authority is adverse to the petitioners the same shall not take effect for a period of two weeks from the date of communication thereof. All rival contentions are kept open. Petition is disposed of accordingly. (R.V.MORE, J.)