1 SSK/28 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2865 OF 2010 Nandan Vasant Pathare ....Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Vivek Salunkhe i/b. Mr. Saiprakash B. Kadam, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. N. Bhosale, AGP for Respondent No.1 to 3. Mr. S. S. Patwardhan i/b. Mrs. Gauri Dalvi, Advocate for Respondent No.4. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 7th APRIL, 2010. P.C.: Heard Mr.Salunkhe, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Bhosale, learned AGP for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Patwardhan, learned Counsel for Respondent No.4. 2. The Petitioner challenges the order dated 6th March, 2010 issued by the Deputy Registrar working in the Office of Joint Registrar. By the said order, the Petitioner is informed that his Appeal/Revision cannot be admitted unless and until the provisions of Section 154 (2A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, are complied with. There is 2 no dispute that certificate under section 101 was issued against the Petitioner at the instance of Respondent No.4. It is the case of the Petitioner that there occurred some delay in filing the revision against the above order and therefore, he personally went to the Office of the Joint Registrar to challenge the certificate under section 101 by way of revision alongwith an application for condonation of delay. However, he was informed that the revision application as well as application for condonation of delay cannot be accepted, unless the Petitioner deposits 50% amount awarded under certificate under section 101, with Respondent No.4. The Petitioner, thereafter sent his revision application alongwith application for condonation of delay by post and thereafter, the Petitioner received a letter dated 6th March, 2010, which is being impugned in the present petition. 3. The Petitioner relies upon two judgments of the learned Single Judge of this High Court in the cases of Jayram P. Pawar & Anr. Vs. Asstt. Registrar for Co-op. Societies Tasgaon & Ors. reported in 2007 (11) LJSOFT (URC) 28 and Dilawar Hakim Shah Versus Special Recovery Officer, Chiplun Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Ors. reported in 2006 (3) Mh.L.J. (page no. 256) and contented that in order to consider the application of condonation of delay occurred in filing revision application, the Petitioner need not comply with the provisions of section 154 (2A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 3 4. Mr. Patwardhan, learned Counsel for Respondent No.4, after taking instructions from his client makes a specific statement that he has no objection if the delay occurred on the part of the Petitioner in filing the revision application challenging the certificate under section 101, is condoned. He further submits, however, stay cannot be granted to certificate issued under section 101 unless the Petitioner complies with mandatory provisions of Section 154 (2A) of the Act. 5. Having gone through the petition alongwith annexures as well as ratio of judgments cited by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and having considered the rival submissions, I feel that the present petition can be disposed of, conveniently by passing the following order : 1. The delay on the part of the Petitioner occurred in filing the revision application challenging the certificate issued under section 101, stands condoned. 2. The Respondent No.2-Divisional Joint Registrar is directed to register the Petitioner’s revision application. 4 3. The Respondent No. 2 - Divisional Joint Registrar shall not hear the Petitioner’s application for stay to the certificate under section 101 or the revision on merit without the Petitioner complying with the provisions of section 154 (2A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. (R. V. MORE, J.)