- 1 - 14-wp-8215-2011 srj IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8215 OF 2011 Yashwant Vividh Karyakari Sahakari (Vikas) Seva Sanstha Ltd. .. Petitioner. V/s. Proposed Mahalaxmi Vividh Karyakari Sahakari (Vikas) Seva Sanstha Mydt. & Others. .. Respondents. Mr. Amit Borkar, for the Petitioner. Mr. S.S. Patwardhan, for Respondent No.1. Ms. M. S. Bane, AGP for Respondent Nos.2,3 and 5. CORAM: G.S.GODBOLE,J. DATE : 13th DECEMBER, 2011. P.C:­ 1 On 4th October, the following order was passed:­ “ Not on board. Taken on board. 2 Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned AGP for the Respondent Nos.2,3 and 5. 3 Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has invited the attention of the Court to the earlier order of this Court dated 20th July, 2011. - 2 - 14-wp-8215-2011 4 The Petition to come up on the scheduled date which is 21st November, 2011. Till next date, operation and execution of the following part of the impugned order will remain stayed. “The Kolhapur District Central Co­operative Bank Ltd. Kolhapur is to continue its finance to the Applicant society till final decision of Appeal bearing No. 165/10.” 2 Thereafter on 7th December, 2011 the following order was passed:­ “1 Mr. Magdum, Advocate states that Mr. Patwardhan has instructions to appear on behalf of the Respondent No.1, who is a contesting Respondent. 2 Issue notice for final disposal, returnable on Tuesday, the 13th December, 2011; to be placed high on board. 3 On the oral request made by Mr. Borkar, the Respondent No.4 Society is allowed to be deleted. Mr. Borkar makes a statement that this Petition does not challenge the order of the State Government in so far as the delay in filing the Appeal has been condoned. Statement accepted. 4 Until further orders, ad­interim relief granted on 4th October, 2011 will continue to operate. Mr. Patwardhan waives service on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and AGP waives service on behalf of the Respondent Nos.2,3 and 5.” 3 RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Patwardhan waives service on behalf of Respondent No. 1 and the learned AGP waives service on behalf of Respondent Nos.2,3 and 5. 4 The only grievance of the Petitioner is in respect of the - 3 - 14-wp-8215-2011 interim direction given by the Minister of State for Co­operation as quoted above in the order dated 4th October, 2011. From the facts which will now be discussed it is clear that the said order is completely unsustainable. 5 Initially by an order dated 8th September, 2010, the Hon'ble Minister (Co­operation) allowed the Revision Application No.574 of 2010 filed by Respondent No.1 before the State Government and by setting aside the order dated 17th March, 2010 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co­operative Society, Panhala, the Respondent­1 Society was directed to be registered. Accordingly, a Registration Certificate was issued on 13th September, 2010. 6 Aggrieved by this order, the present Petitioner filed Writ Petition No.8696 of 2010. On 7th December, 2010, the said Petition was allowed. The order passed by the Hon'ble Minister on 8th September, 2010 was quashed and set aside. Respondent No.1 was permitted to withdraw the Revision Application No.574 of 2010 with liberty to file Appeal under Section 152 of the Act. Accordingly, the revision was withdrawn and appeal was filed being Appeal No.165 of 2010 before the learned Divisional Joint Registrar, Co­operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur. Since there was a delay, an application for condonation of delay was also filed. 7 By Judgment and Order dated 10th March, 2011, the learned - 4 - 14-wp-8215-2011 Divisional Joint Registrar Co­operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur dismissed the application for condonation of delay. Aggrieved by this order, Respondent No.1­Society filed Revision Application No.378 of 2011 before the State Government along with Application for stay/interim relief to the effect that the District Central Co­operative Bank, Kolhapur should be directed to continue its finance to Respondent No.1 till the decision of the revision. By order dated 8th April, 2011, the Minister of State for Co­operation granted the aforesaid interim relief. Aggrieved by this order, the Petitioner filed Writ Petition No.3315 of 2011 in this Court. By reasoned Judgment and Order dated 20th July, 2011 the learned Single Judge (Coram: A. S. Oka J.) allowed the said Writ Petition No.3315 of 2011 and directed that the Revision Application will be heard on its own merits. 8 Thereafter, by impugned Judgment and Order dated 22nd September, 2011, the Hon'ble Minister of State for Co­operation has not only allowed the Writ Petition and condoned the delay in filing Appeal before the learned Divisional Joint Registrar, Co­operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur, but has also passed an order that the District Central Co­operative Bank shall continue its finance to Respondent No.1­ Society till the final decision of Appeal No.165 of 2010. This part of the order is impugned. - 5 - 14-wp-8215-2011 9 In my opinion, the order is completely unsustainable. The order condoning the delay in filing appeal is proper and in fact, that order is not challenged in this Petition. However, while allowing the Revision Application filed for challenging the order dismissing the application for condonation of delay in filing Appeal, the Hon'ble Minister of State for Co­ operation could not have passed the interim order, directing the bank to continue finance. It is well settled that an interim order can be passed only in aid of final relief which can be granted in any proceeding and final relief of allowing Revision Application had also been granted. In view of this, the further relief directing District Central Co­operative Bank to continue the finance, pending appeal before the learned Divisional Joint Registrar, Co­operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur was clearly without jurisdiction and could not have been granted by the Hon'ble Minister of State for Co­operation. On this ground alone, the said order deserves to be quashed and set aside and the Writ Petition deserves to succeed. 10 Hence, I pass the following order:­ (i) Rule is made partly absolute. The part of the impugned Judgment and Order dated 22nd September, 2011 passed by the Hon'ble Minister of State for Co­operation in Revision Application No.378 of 2011 in so far as it directed the - 6 - 14-wp-8215-2011 District Central Co­operative Bank to continue its finance to Respondent No.1­Society till the final decision of Appeal No.165 of 2010 is quashed and set aside. (ii) All other contentions of the parties on the merits of the Appeal are kept open. (G.S.GODBOLE,J.)