1 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.101/2008. (Smt.Indirabai Walse and Ors. Vs. Vitthal Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd., Laur and Anr.) ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Mr.PB Shirsath, Advocate for petitioners; Mr.AN Irpatgire, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. ___ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 25th January, 2010. ... 1) Mr.Shirsath seeks to tender rejoinder on behalf of the petitioners to refute the contentions relating to grant of certification under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act and the consequences arising therefrom. 2) Rejoinder accepted, copy of which is received by other side. 3) Heard. 4) The petitioners herein feel that the order of Division Bench in Writ Petition No.2368/2007 dated 23rd April, 2007, which reads as under,: "Till further orders, no further steps under the Sensitization Act including by way of auction shall be taken so far as petitioner’s properties are concerned." is flouted by the respondent herein, the 2 Cooperative bank, as the property of the petitioners herein is purportedly put to auction. 5) Affidavit in reply of Shri Shivaji Lomte, Manager and Recovery Officer of the cooperative bank, is tendered, in which, he has said that auction notice dated 25.2.2008 is not issued under Rule 8 of Security Enforcement Rules and is issued under Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961 in pursuance of the Recovery Certificate dated 19.11.2007. 6) Mr. Shirsath for the petitioners herein has by rejoinder informed, the land Gut No.30/B belonging to Balasaheb s/o Eknath Walase was mortgaged to the bank. The property of Eknath Kundlik Walase, and particularly the land Gut No. 2B­2 admeasuring 1 hectare and 71 R. situated at Thorali Wadi Tq.Ahmedpur, had no charge. 7) The challenge in the Writ Petition was in terms of Section 31 of the Sensitization Act. Obviously, the recovery certificate, referred by the respondent in the affidavit and the action contemplated, being beyond the scope of the directions in writ petition, prima facie, it is clear, there is no violation or breach of the directions referred 3 above. 8) The remedies, if any, to the aggrieved petitioners will be in terms of Section 101, sub­rule (19­A) or Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act and the Rules of 1961. 9) The Contempt Petition lacks merit, it is dismissed. 10)Interim protection dated 27th March,2008 is further extended up to 25th February, 2010. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/cp101.08