IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition no. 3965/2011 Soma Rudaji Mandawkar ..VS.. Asstt. Registrar,Co-op. Societies and others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. G.G. Bade, Adv. for the petitioner. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK J. DATE : 7 th September, 2011. Heard. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the auction notice dated 12.1.2010 and the notice dated 26.7.2010 issued by the Co-operative Society, Bhandara in regard to the confirmation of the sale of the agricultural property. The only submission made on behalf of the petitioner is that the respondent no. 2 bank is trying to recover an exorbitant sum towards the recovery of the loan amount. It is, however, necessary to note that the recovery certificate was issued against the petitioner to the tune of Rs.5,09,582/-. Though the Co-operative Court did not have any jurisdiction to decide a dispute against the grant of recovery certificate, the petitioner had moved the Co-operative Court against the same. The dispute was later on withdrawn on 6.3.2010 and a revision was filed before the Assistant Registrar along with an application for condonation of delay. The application for condonation of delay was dismissed by the Divisional Joint Registrar on 10.5.2010 and the revision filed by the petitioner against the said order was also dismissed. The petitioner preferred a LPA against the order but the same was also dismissed. Ultimately, a review application filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the petitioner is now challenging the notice of auction dated 12.1.2010 and the notice of confirmation of sale only on the ground that the petitioner is not liable to pay the amount which is sought to be recovered from the petitioner in terms of the recovery certificate. Since the recovery certificate has attained finality and since the petitioner has not made out any other ground for challenging the auction notice dated 12.1.2010 and the confirmation of sale notice dated 26.7.2010, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan