1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.865 OF 1992 WRIT PETITION NO.865 OF 1992 WRIT PETITION NO.865 OF 1992 Rawalnath V.K.S. (Vikas) Seva Maryadit Kumari & Ors. .. Petitioners. Vs. The Assistant Registrar Gadhinglaj and Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.S.L.Kapse for the petitioners. Mr.A.H.Palekar AGP for respondent nos.1, 3 and 5. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2005 DATED : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2005 DATED : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2005 P.C.: . Heard Mr.Kapse, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Palekar, learned AGP for respondent nos.1, 3 and 5. 2. This petition was filed in 1992 against the order of supersession passed under section 78 of the Maharashtra Co-opertive Societies Act, 1960 (for short "the Act"). While admitting the petition interim stay in terms of prayer clause (c) was granted by which the execution and operation of the impugned order dated 20.11.1991 was stayed. Mr.Kapse, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are not in touch with him and he has no instructions as to what happened after 1992. Admittedly, the term of the then managing committee, which was superseded, got over 2 2 2 long back and it seems that thereafter atleast two elections of the petitioner no.1 - society were held. Keeping that in view and considering the scheme of provisions contain in section 78 of the Act, in my opinion, nothing further survives in the instant writ petition and that may be the reason why Mr.Kapse is not getting any response from the petitioners. It seems that they have lost interest in the instant proceedings. In the circumstances this petition is dismissed as infructuous. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)