wp7107­10.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7107 OF 2010 Natoli Seva Sahakari Society Ltd ..Petitioner versus The Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur & Ors ..Respondents Mr.J.Shekhar i/by M/s.J.Shekhar & Co for the petitioner. Mr.S.N.Bhosle, A.G.P for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 77. Mr.P.D.Dalvi for respondent Nos.3 to 21, 23, 24, 26 to 70, 72 to 75. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 6th July 2011. P.C.: . By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are impugning the order dated 6th August 2009 of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Shirala, District Sangli. That order has been confirmed on 26th April 2010 by the Divisional Joint Registrar in Revision Application Nos.460 of 2009 to 533 of 2009. wp7107­10.doc 2 2 The issue was, as to whether respondent Nos.3 to 76 to this writ petition can be enrolled as members of the petitioner-Society. The argument before the authorities was that the petitioner is Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society. The by-laws of the Society would show that respondent Nos.3 to 76 are not eligible because they are not residing in village Natoli and they are also not possessing any land in the said village, nor are they khatedar members of the said village. The authorities considered these objections and concurrently held that each of these persons are having their lands in village Natoli and there is a documentary evidence on record evidencing it. There is no other condition, save and except, this, which has to be fulfilled by them for being enrolled as members of the petitioner-Society. The argument now canvassed is that they should have minimum 10 Ares agricultural lands within the area of petitioner-Society. However, that by-law is not the applicable by-law inasmuch as the order of Assistant Registrar dated 6th August 2009 is concerned, the conclusion is that, the by-law which has been wp7107­10.doc 3 enforced on the date of application, it should be held to be applicable and any subsequent by-law including model by-law cannot be relied upon. 3 It is this conclusion of the authorities which is challenged in this writ petition. The Assistant Registrar has filed an affidavit in the light of the notice issued by this Court and he has clarified that the prevailing by-law is No.4(5) wherein there is no condition of holding 10 Ares agricultural lands. The accepted by-law which is relied upon is dated 20th October 2009. It is in this model by-law which has been accepted from this date that the condition of 10 Ares land is being inserted and relied upon. This condition cannot be applicable to the issue of membership of respondent Nos.3 to 76. 4 It is consistent with the clarification that has been given above, that both authorities found that respondent Nos.3 to 76 were eligible for being enrolled and they have been wrongly not enrolled as such. Therefore, the impugned wp7107­10.doc 4 directions had been issued. These directions are consistent with the terms and conditions of the applicable by-laws and finding that the same are fulfilled by each of the applicants/respondent Nos.3 to 76 that subject orders have been passed. I do not see any error of law or perversity therein warranting interference in the writ jurisdiction. The petition is devoid of any merits and dismissed. Ad-interim orders, if any, to stand vacated. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)