JUDGMENT - S.A. BOBDE, J.:—This petition is directed against the order dated 15th June, 2001, passed by the Minister of State for Co-operation, under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

2. The predecessors of Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank (hereinafter referred to as petitioner/bank) gave a loan to Ajintha Sahakari Ginning Pressing Factory Ltd., Buldana/respondent No. 2-society. The respondent No. 2-society, failed to repay the loan amount. Thereafter the predecessors of the petitioner-bank demanded repayment of the loan from the respondent No. 2-society. On 5-11-1987, the respondent No. 2-society requested the predecessors of the petitioner-bank for sympathetic consideration, i.e. grant of further time to repay the loan outstanding amount of Rs. 14,31,672.08. After about a year the petitioner-bank initiated proceedings for recovery of the loan amount under section 101 of the Act before the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Buldana. In response to the notice issued by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Buldana, dated 21-11-1988, the respondent No. 2-society, by its communication dated 9-12-1988 informed the Assistant Registrar that it is in the process of obtaining loan from Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank and that loan amount would be available in or about four months and, therefore, the respondent No. 2-society may be granted four months' time to repay the loan amount. By that letter it was requested by the respondent No. 2-society for particulars of accounts. It is noteworthy that the respondent No. 2-society did not deny its liability.

3. Eventually, the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Buldana, issued a recovery certificate under section 101 of the Act. Before issuing the recovery certificate, as aforesaid, the Assistant Registrar duly issued notices to the respondent No. 2-society and an inquiry was also conducted. By the said recovery certificate the Assistant Registrar directed the petitioner-bank to recover a sum of Rs. 16,89,316.45 with interest @ 16% per annum. There is apparently a typographical error in the copy of the recovery certificate annexed to the writ petition. In the copy of the recovery certificate filed in this Court at Annexure IV, the rate of interest is shown as 6%. However, Mr. Bhide, learned Counsel for the petitioner-bank has submitted on the basis of a photo copy of certified copy of the original recovery certificate that the rate of interest is 16% per annum. He has also tendered an affidavit to that effect.

4. After issuance of the recovery certificate dated 31st January, 1989, admittedly, the respondent No. 2-society did nothing for a period of about 9 years. On 20th June, 1998, the respondent No. 2-society, filed a revision petition under section 154 of the Act, in which notices were issued to respondent No. 2-society, which was dismissed on 24-3-1999.

5. The respondent No. 2-society, thereafter did nothing for almost a year. On 7-3-2000, they have filed a second revision before the State Government in which impugned order is passed by the respondent No. 3-Minister. It must be noted here that before the impugned order was passed by the Minister, the respondent No. 2-society had filed a Writ Petition No. 1593/2000, which was withdrawn on 18th July, 2000 in order to pursue revision, which it had already filed. While allowing withdrawal of the aforesaid writ petition, this Court granted liberty to the respondent No. 2-society to pursue the revision, if maintainable.

6. Eventually, the revision has been allowed by the impugned order dated 15th June, 2001. The Minister while deciding the revision, without considering the question of limitation, has simply held that the revision is maintainable. He has further held that the petitioner-bank should resort to the recovery in question by initiating proceedings under section 91 of the Act, against the respondent No. 2-society, because the pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document