The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the prescribed procedure for challenging auction sales and the availability of alternate remedies under the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act.

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith.

3. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing and heard finally.

4. This writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenges the order dated 15/01/2011 passed by respondent No.2 Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Aurangabad on the revision filed by respondent No.4 bearing No. 23/2010. This revision was filed under the provisions of Section 154 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (Henceforth referred as “the Act”).

The facts leading to the litigation are as under:

5. Respondent No.4 availed loan from the petitioner in year 2004 but despite of demands, did not repay the same fully. So, the petitioner Bank started proceeding under section 101 of the Act for getting certificate of recovery. Accordingly, on 29th September, 2006 a certificate under section 101 was issued against respondent No.4 directing her to pay a sum of Rs. 31,77,627/- + interest @ 18% per annum etc. Soon thereafter, the Bank initiated execution of this certificate and the Recovery Officer (Petitioner No. 2) appointed in the matter under provisions of Rule 2 (h), issued an order of attachment of the mortgaged property belonging to respondent No.4. The property in dispute are a flat at Aurangabad and two plots in the vicinity of Aurangabad City. After the properties were attached, respondent No.4 preferred revision against the order of attachment but failed. In the mean time, the Bank urged Recovery Officer to initiate proceeding for auction sale of the properties in dispute. The Recovery Officer thereafter took steps and ultimately published a notice in news paper for auction sale of the properties on 16/04/2009. The auction sale was scheduled on 18/05/2009. The auction took place and the respondents No.5 and 6 apparently succeeded in making highest bid and the Recovery Officer then declared that the properties would be sold to them subject to provision of Rule 107 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules. Soon after the auction, the Recovery Officer issued a notice to respondent No.4 directing her to deposit the dues within 30 days but in vain. Respondent No.4 filed writ petition No. 914/2009 in this Court against the action of auction sale. But the same was dismissed. Thereafter, the Recovery Officer confirmed the sale and executed sale deeds on 03/07/2009 in favour of respondents No.5 and 6. Again respondent No.4 came before this Court filing Writ Petition No. 5112/2009 on 21st July, 2009 challenging the legality of the sale etc. This Court dismissed this Writ Petition holding that respondent No.4 had alternate remedy. Thereafter, respondent No.4 filed revision on 26/10/2009 before the D.J.R. (respondent No.2) who allowed it holding that several serious irregularities had occurred in the proceeding of sale and therefore, he ordered setting aside of the same and directed the Recovery Officer to start the proceeding for sale afresh. Petitioner No.1 Bank and petitioner No.2 Recovery Officer have filed this Writ petition.

6. The first point the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner raised is that the revision was not at all maintainable. He pointed out that the revisional Court could not have gone into the aspects which he examined while deciding the revision. In order to examine as to whether the respondent No.4 could challenge the lawfulness of the sale by filing a revision one must go through the provisions of Rule 107, specially Sub-rule 12, 13 and 14. Sub rule 12, 13 and 14 which are quoted below. (12) Where prior to the date fixed for a sale, the defaulter or any person acting on his behalf or any person claiming an interest in the property sought to be sold tenders payment of the full amount due together with interest, batta and other expenses incurred in bringing the property to sale, including the expenses of attachment, if any, the Sale Officer shall forthwith release the property after can