1 wp3398 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3398 OF 2011 The Ugaon Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Tal.Nihad, Dist.Nasik ...Petitioner vs. The Sanjivani Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit Ugaon & ors. ...Respondents Mr.A.Y.Sakhare i/b Mr.Rameshwar Gite for the Petitioner Mr.Anilkumar Patil for the respondent no.1 Ms Aparna Vhatkar, A.G.P for respondent nos.2 to 5 CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 30, 2011 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the first respondent and the learned A.G.P for respondent nos. 2 to 5. 2 Considering the narrow controversy involved in the writ petition, the same is taken up for final disposal. 3 Before dealing with the merits of the case, a reference will have to be made to the order dated 8th September 2011 passed by this Court. In the affidavit filed by the State Government there is sufficient explanation for the delay in forwarding the record. Explanation is accepted. No further 2 wp3398 action is called for. 4 The challenge in this writ petition is to the Judgment and order dated 9th March 2011 passed by the State Government in an appeal preferred by the first respondent. 5 The first respondent applied for registration of the society. The proposal was rejected by the Assistant Registrar. Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal under section 152 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act,1960 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) was preferred by the first respondent before the State Government. By the impugned order, the said appeal was allowed and by setting aside the order of the Assistant Registrar, the registration of the first respondent was ordered. There are various challenges in this petition. The first challenge is on the ground that the petitioner was not served with the notice of the hearing of the appeal fixed on 23rd February 2011 and in fact the petitioner received the notice on 24th February 2011. 6 Therefore, record of the appeal was called for. I have perused the record. The record shows that hearing of the appeal was fixed on 17th February 2011 which was adjourned to 23rd February 2011. Roznama records that the notice was ordered to be issued of the date fixed for hearing. On 23rd February 2011, Roznama notes that the Advocate for the first respondent was present and none appeared for the petitioner and therefore, appeal was closed for 3 wp3398 orders. 7 Perusal of the file containing proceedings of the appeal shows that notice of the date fixed was issued on 18th February 2011. However, there is nothing on record to show that notice was served before 23rd February 2011. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner has produced a postal envelope containing notice which records an endorsement that the same was received on 24th February 2011. 8 Thus, the petitioner was not given notice that the appeal was fixed for hearing on 23rd February 2011. In fact, the concerned Officer of the State Government ought to have verified whether the notice was served before the Appeal was placed before the Appellate Authority for hearing. 9 The learned counsel for the first respondent could not show that the notice was served to the petitioner prior to 23rd February 2011. However, he submitted that after registration of the society, loans have been disbursed to the members. 10 The petitioner was impleaded in the appeal preferred by the first respondent as a necessary party. The record shows that the petitioner was not served with the notice of the date fixed for hearing of the Appeal. Therefore, impugned order has been passed in breach of principles of natural justice. Hence, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside by keeping open all the contentions on merits. 4 wp3398 11 Hence, I pass the following order : i) Impugned order dated 9th March 2011 is quashed and set aside. The Appeal is restored to file. ii)Parties are directed to appear before the Appellate Authority on 17th October 2011 at 2.30 p.m only for fixing the schedule of hearing of the appeal. iii)All contentions of the parties on merits of the Appeal are kept open. iv)Hearing of the appeal is expedited. v) The Appellate Authority shall endeavour to decide the appeal before the end of November 2011. vi)It is obvious that the consequential orders passed by the Assistant Registrar on the basis of the impugned order also stand set aside. vii)The Petition is partly allowed on above terms. JUDGE