Back
In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
NARESH H. PATIL & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. TATED
Vasant s/o Rangnath Chorghade & Another
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Others
WRIT PETITION NO.7312 OF 2008 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1175 OF 2009
Decided on: 23-07-2010
Contempt of Court - Cooperative Society - Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - Sections 77(A)(1), 157 - Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act - Section 189 - Illegal Allotment of Shops - Contempt of Court - Cancellation of Allotment - Refund of Amount with Interest - Reallotment through Public Tender - Order to Rectify Construction Deficiencies - Direction to Authorities - No Stay Granted
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute regarding the illegal allotment of shops by a cooperative society and the subsequent contempt of court by the administrative board. The court found that the administrative board had acted in total disregard of the court's orders and the rule of law. The Municipal Council also failed in its duties, contributing to the illegal activities. The court ordered the cancellation of the allotment of shops, refund of the amount with interest, reallotment through public tender, and rectification of construction deficiencies. The authorities were directed to take over possession of the allotted shops and to refrain from creating third-party interests.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the actions of the administrative board and the Municipal Council were in total disregard of the court's orders and the rule of law. It also noted the shifting stands of the respondents and the lapses on the part of the Municipal Council. The court partly allowed the writ petitions, cancelling the allotment of shops, ordering refund with interest, reallotment through public tender, and rectification of construction deficiencies. The authorities were directed to take over possession of the allotted shops and to refrain from creating third-party interests.
Issues: The issues involved the illegal allotment of shops, contempt of court by the administrative board, and the failure of the Municipal Council to fulfill its duties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the findings of contempt of court, illegal activities by the administrative board, and the lapses of the Municipal Council. The court ordered the cancellation of the allotment of shops, refund of the amount with interest, reallotment through public tender, and rectification of construction deficiencies.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the writ petitions, cancelling the allotment of shops, ordering refund with interest, reallotment through public tender, and rectification of construction deficiencies. The authorities were directed to take over possession of the allotted shops and to refrain from creating third-party interests. No stay was granted on the effect and operation of the judgment and order.
NARESH H. PATIL, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.7312 of 2008 prayed for directions to Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to declare election programme for holding election of Respondent No.6 Gangakhed Taluka Sahakari Kharedi Vikri Sangh Ltd., Gangakhed, Dist-Parbhani. The Petitioner further prayed for granting injunction against the Authorities from appointing any Administrative Board. The Petitioner prayed for directions to prevent the Administrative Board from disposing of the immovable property of the Respondent No.6 Sangh. Byway of amendment, the Petitioner prayed for directions to Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to take the charge of the Respondent No.6 Sangh and to take possession of the property of the Sangh which was illegally delivered to Respondent Nos. 13, 14 and other traders. The Petitioner prayed for interim relief.
3. In Writ Petition No.1175 of 2009 the Petitioner prayed for setting aside the impugned resolution dated 3rd December, 2008 passed by the Board in respect of allotment of shops to Respondent Nos. 7 to 23 therein and for conducting enquiry. The Petitioner prayed for directions to re-allot the shops afresh. It is further prayed that Respondent No.3 be directed to reserve 10% shops in the allotment of shops for Educated Unemployed and for interim relief.
4. By an order dated 27th January 2009, notices were issued and ad interim relief in terms of prayer clause (G) was granted in Writ Petition No.7312 of 2008 by the Division Bench of this Court. Prayer clause (G) reads as under:
"Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, the respondent authority may please be directed to prevent the administrative board of director from disposing the immovable property of the respondent No.6 society".
5. On 2nd September, 2009, the Division Bench of this Court (Coram: B.R. Gavai & N.D. Deshpande, JJ.) passed order in Writ Petition No. 7312 of 2008. Para 12 and 13 of the Order reads thus:
"12] The attitude of the respondent Nos.6/15 and 8 appears to be "Might is Right". The said act shows total disrespect and disregard to the orders passed by this Court and to the institution of administration of justice. No person howsoever high he may be can claim that he is above the law. Not only this, but the respondent No.15 also had an audacity to file a false affidavit before this Court. Knowing very well that the property belonging to the respondent No.6 is transferred in utter disregard and in violation of the orders passed by this Court, he has an audacity to say in the affidavit filed on 20th April, 2009 that the property belonging to the respondent No.6 is not disposed of and that it will be put on hire for a period not exceeding 3 years. The said averment is totally false to the knowledge of the respondent No.15.
13] Issue notice to the respondent No.15 and respondent No.8 asking them to personally remain present in this Court on 15th September, 2009 and to show cause as to why action for committing contempt of court be not taken against them. In addition notice be issued to the respondent No.15, as to why action for committing perjury as defined under Section 192 of the I.P.C. be not taken against him, under Section 340 of the Cr. P.C. Notice is made returnable on 15th September, 2009."
6. The matter thereafter was heard on some occasions and was adjourned from time to time. By an order dated 26th April, 2010 the Division Bench of this Court (Coram: Naresh H. Patil and A.V. Potdar, JJ.) directed to take cognizance of the contempt and issue notices to Respondent Nos. 8 to 12 and 15 in Writ Petition No.7312 of 2008 under the Contempt of Courts Act. They were directed to appear before the Court assigned with hearing of Contempt Petitions. This Court further directed that operation and execution of the lease deeds executed in favour of the allottees be suspended until further orders. This Court further directed not to create any third party interest in respect of the s
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
