JUDGMENT - Y.K. SABHARWAL, C.J.:---Rule. Returnable forthwith. Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 waive service. Learned Counsel for the petitioner gives up respondent No. 7 Chief Vigilance Commissioner.

2. The Nashik Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd. (for short Bank) is respondent No. 1 in the petition. The State of Maharashtra, the Commissioner and Registrar Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra State, the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies at Nashik and the Special Auditor, Class-I, Co-operative Societies are respondent Nos. 2 to 5 respectively. The 6th respondent is Chief General Manager, Reserve Bank of India.

3. The petitioner seeks issue of appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondent No. 5 to continue and complete the audit of the Bank for the year 1997-98 and submit audit report and respondent No. 6 (RBI) be directed to investigate into the allegations made by the petitioner. The grievance, as set out in the petition, in brief, is that the Bank has not permitted Special Auditor appointed under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short 'Act') to complete the audit which is illegal. In respect of the year in question (1997-98) special audit under the provisions of section 81 was entrusted to Special Government Auditor. According to the petitioner, the said Auditor completed most of the audit work but the Bank did not supply to the auditor requisite information and, instead, appointed their own auditor. In the Annual General Meeting for the year 1997-98- held on 14-8-1998, it is alleged that the audit report submitted by the internal auditors of the bank was placed before the meeting and not one prepared by the Special Auditor. According to the petitioner, the bank cannot change the Special Auditor on the ground of his failure to submit report before 14-8-1998 and, instead, appoint its own auditor. The petitioner says that the bank has misapplied the Division Bench decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 5038 of 1998 in the (Appollo Textile Mills Employees' Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra another)1, decided on 15-10-1998. This petition was disposed of as per the Minutes of the Order.

4. The Bank in its affidavit has given its own version. However, we need not go into the factual matrix. The Bank also states that in view of the aforesaid decision in Appollo Textiles case, there was no illegality in getting the audit conducted by an auditor appointed by it from the Panel of auditors maintained by the Registrar or by Chartered Accountant holding the Certificate in Co-operative Audit issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India as there was failure on the part of the Special Auditor to submit the audit report.

5. In the Minutes of the Order in the Appollo Textiles case. Rule in terms of prayer (c) was made absolute, which reads as under :---

"This Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, directing the respondents, their agents and subordinates not to interfere in any manner in the audit of co-operative societies covered under section 81(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 being done by the Co-operatives through the auditors of their choice by an Auditor from the panel of certified auditors of the Registrar or by a Chartered Accountant holding a certificate in co-operative audit issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, in case the Registrar fails to do the audit at least once in a co-operative year and fails to present the audit report of the previous year on or before 15th of August, the last date for calling the annual general body meeting of that year, of every society covered under section 81(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960".

The Minutes of the Order also records that---

"In such circumstances, in order to enable the committees of societies to fulfill their statutory obligation to submit the audit reports in time and to protect the intere

Click Here to Read the rest of this document