The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the Act does not explicitly require a hearing for the society before taking action under Section 79, the principles of natural justice should be followed, especially as the order under Section 79 is appealable.

(P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.)

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.1133 of 2011, by which the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein and set aside the order of remand passed by the respondent No.7.

2. Respondent Nos.2 to 6 are the members of the appellant (for the sake of brevity, hereinafter referred to as “Karkhana”). The said Kharkhana is a specified Cooperative society engaged in the business of crushing sugarcane and manufacturing of sugar. Respondent No.1, Regional Joint Director (Sugar), is an authority who exercises, control supervision and functioning of the said Kharkhana. Respondent No.7 is the appellate authority under Section 152(a) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 [for short “the Act”].

3. Respondent Nos.2 to 6 preferred an application to the appellant Kharkhana on 07-07-2010 for supplying the list of its members. By another application dated 26-07-2010, the said respondents also applied for certified copy of Agenda and Minutes of Meetings of Board of Directors held during period between 01-04-2008 to 30-06-2010. Since the aforesaid documents were not supplied by the Kharkhana, respondent No.1 informed the Managing Director of the Kharkhana in connection with the respondent’s grievance and it was directed that list of members of Kharkhana should be made available after receiving necessary copying charges. It is the case of present respondent Nos.2 to 6 that in spite of various reminders, the said documents were not made available to them. Respondent No.1 thereafter, informed the Kharkhana by a letter dated 24-09-2010, asking them to supply list of its members. It is also the case of respondent Nos.2 to 6 that in spite of deposit of requisite charges, the said documents were not supplied to them. Similarly, Minutes of Meetings of Board of Directors were also not made available to the concerned respondents, as according to the appellant Kharkhana, the said respondents are not entitled to have copy of the said Minutes of Meetings of Board of Directors, especially when it is not pertaining to the transaction of the said respondents and therefore, copies of Minutes of the Meetings is not required to be given to the respondent Nos.2 to 6. Respondent No.1 thereafter, on 10-11-2010 passed an order under Section 79 of the said Act, thereby directing the Kharkhana to supply list of its members, copies of Agenda and Minutes of Meetings of Board of Directors held between 01-04-2008 to 30-06-2010. The said order was challenged by the present appellant by filing an appeal before respondent No.7. Respondent No.7 allowed the said appeal and remanded the matter to respondent No.1 on the ground that the order was passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the Society. The said remand order was challenged by respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein, before the learned Single Judge by way of Writ Petition No.1133 of 2011. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that looking to the scheme of Section 79 of the Act, no hearing is contemplated under subsection (2) of the Act. However, an opportunity of hearing is contemplated under subsection (3) to the officer of the society, but no hearing is contemplated so far as Society is concerned. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that a member is entitled to have copy of any of the documents/Registers within one month from the date of payment of such cost and as per Section 32 of the Act, a member cannot be denied of such right. The learned Single Judge also held that a member is also entitled to have Minutes of Committee Meetings and it should not be restricted only in connection with transaction in respect of such a member. According to the learned Single Judge, any transaction discussed in such meetings of the Committee, should be made available to the person at his request or demand. The learned Single Jude accordingly found that since n