JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:­-Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner, the respondent No. 1-A in person and the learned Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

2. Though the impugned order is sought to be challenged on various grounds, it is not necessary to consider all those grounds in this petition, and suffice to say to the point of lack of jurisdiction to the Secretary for Co-operation to entertain the revision application under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 against the order dated 22nd March, 1999 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Appeal) M.D., Mumbai, in Revision Application No. 341 of 1998. Undoubtedly, simultaneously, it is also necessary to consider the grievance of the respondent No. 1a in relation to the order passed in the Revision Application No. 341 of 1998 on 22nd March, 1999.

3. This Court has consistently held that no second revision is maintainable under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Once the authority acting under the said Act, in exercise of the provisions of section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, entertains the Revision Application against the order passed by any lower authority, there cannot be any further revision application against the order passed by the said revisional authority. The law in that regard is well-settled consequent to the decisions in the matters of (Ramesh T. Gopalani v. Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd., Kalyan)1, reported in 2000(3) Bom.C.R. 474, (Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank Limited another v. Deepak S/o. Wamanrao Ware others)2, reported in 2003(1) Bom.C.R. (N.B.)154, (Madhukar Baburao Deshmukh v. Jalgaon Jillha Maratha Vidya Prasarak Co-op. Samaj Ltd., Jalgaon others)3, reported in 2002(Supp.) Bom.C.R. (A.B.)847 and (Virendra Bhanji Rathod others v. Anand Vihar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai others)4, reported in 2004(3) Bom.C.R. (O.O.C.J.)401.

4. In the case in hand, undoubtedly, the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, had entertained the Revision Application No. 341 of 1998 against the order dated 10th August, 1998 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies D Ward, Mumbai. Once the said revisional powers were already exercised by the Divisional Joint Registrar under section 154 of the said Act, it was not permissible for the Secretary Co-operation, Government of Maharashtra, to exercise those powers once again in relation to the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar under section 154 of the said Act. On that count alone, therefore, the impugned order passed by the Secretary (Co-operation), Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai, on 4th May, 2000 in Revision Application being No. RVA 2799/CR-280/15-C filed by the respondent No. 1 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

5. It has been strenuously argued by the respondent No. 1a that the revisional authority viz. the Divisional Joint Registrar, while disposing of the said revision application, did not take into consideration the various materials placed before it and thereby acted in improper exercise of jurisdiction while deciding the said matter. The order passed on 22nd March, 1999 in Revision Application No. 341 of 1998 does not disclose that the authority has taken into consideration all the points which were sought to be agitated by the said respondent and also the materials which are stated to have been placed before the concerned authority.

6. It is further to be noted that the respondent No. 1a has not filed any petition against the said order dated 22nd March, 1999 in Revision Application No. 341 of 1998 and yet she seeks to challenge the same in this petition filed by the petitioner against her and others in relation to the order dated 4th May, 2000 passed by the Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra. Undoubtedly, normally such a course may not be adopted. However, here are the extra-ordinary circumstances which reveal that the order

Click Here to Read the rest of this document