1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3295 OF 2008 (Smt. Priya Girdhar Bohare vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Coop. Societies, Nagpur & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DECEMBER 08, 2008. The matter is being heard since day before yesterday and after hearing Shri Mokadam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Patel, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 & 2, Shri Shah, learned counsel for respondents No. 3 & 4 and Shri Parihar, learned counsel for respondent No.5, it has become clear that Respondent No.2 has set aside the auction in favour of the petitioner without issuing notice to the petitioner and without hearing the petitioner. The learned counsel for respondent No.5 has tried to justify the action by pointing out that the notice of proposed action was never served upon Respondent No.5. However, that can be a relevant circumstance for consideration by Respondent No.2, if the fact is proved. Shri Mokadam, learned counsel has tried to contend that it was not necessary for the Special Recovery Officer to forward the proposal for 2 approval to Respondent No.2. He contends that Respondent No.2 could not have, after expiry of period of one month, taken any action either for cancellation or setting aside of auction on the application moved by Respondent No.5. I find that there is no challenge in present writ petition or even in revision before the Divisional Joint Registrar on these lines. However, the point arises for consideration and therefore, Respondent No.2 is free to consider it after hearing parties. In the circumstances, the impugned order passed by Respondent No.2 – Assistant Registrar and Respondent No.1 – Divisional Joint Registrar dated 3.1.2008 and 27.6.2008 respectively are hereby quashed and set aside. The parties shall appear before Respondent No.2 on 5.1.2009 and Respondent No.2 shall after hearing borrower as also the purchaser (present petitioner) examine relevant issues and decide the controversy afresh as early as possible and in any case by 15th February 2009. Till then, the order of status quo passed by this Court shall remain in operation. Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.