JUDGMENT :

RULE. Heard finally with consent of counsel for the parties.

2. The challenge raised in Writ Petition No.3274 of 2019 is to the order dated 25.03.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Fisheries directing deregistration of the petitioner Society under Section 21A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, ‘the said Act’). In Writ Petition No.1887 of 2018, the order dated 03.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Fisheries setting aside the allotment of Jamnala Tank that was made in favour of the petitioner Society is under challenge.

3. The facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that the petitioner Society has been duly registered under the provisions of the said Act on 21.06.2007. When the said Society was registered, the villages of Botha and Dongargaon were shown as the areas of operation of the said Society with its registered Office at Botha. The respondent no.4 Society is also duly registered under the provisions of the said Act prior to the petitioner Society on 05.05.2007. The villages of Morath, Veni, Dharmoha, Devkarwadi, Jamnala and Wakodi are shown as the areas of operation of the respondent no.4 Society. According to the respondent no.4 Society, Jamnala tank was falling within its area of operation. However, the petitioner Society by misrepresentation and by tampering with the relevant documents sought to include that area within its area of operation. The respondent no.4 Society therefore sought deregistration of the petitioner Society on the ground that it had been registered by misrepresenting various vital aspects. The Office of the Commissioner of Fisheries thus issued a notice the petitioner Society on 21.12.2017 calling upon the petitioner Society to show cause why it should not be deregistered. The petitioner Society filed its submissions and opposed the application as moved. Besides raising the objection as to the jurisdiction on the part of the Commissioner to initiate proceedings for deregistration it was pleaded that as the petitioner Society was registered in the year 2007, the prayer for deregistration made after a period of more than three years was barred by limitation. After referring to various documents it was sought to be urged that the petitioner-Society was duly registered after following the requisite procedure without misrepresenting any facts. The Commissioner of Fisheries after giving due opportunity to the parties passed an order on 25.03.2019 and came to the conclusion that the application preferred by the respondent no.4 seeking deregistration under Section 21A of the said Act was tenable and warranted consideration. It then recorded a finding that various villages which were not within the area of operation of the petitioner-Society including Jamnala had been so included by making alterations in the requisite documents. Similarly, it was found that the documents pertaining to the proof of residence of the members were fabricated and the Chief Promoter was a different person than the one shown. The Commissioner of Fisheries was of the view that registration had been granted to the petitioner Society through misrepresentation. On that count, order under Section 21A of the said Act came to be passed on 25.03.2019 deregistering the petitioner-Society. Being aggrieved, the petitioner-Society has challenged the said order in Writ Petition No.3274 of 2019.

4. Shri R.L. Khapre, learned counsel for the petitioner-society in support of the challenge to the impugned order submitted that the said order had been passed without following the principles of natural justice. The documents referred to in the show cause notice dated 21.12.2017 had not been supplied to the petitioner-Society and therefore the Society could not put forth its defence in proper manner. He submitted that since the action of deregistration of a Society is a drastic action and the proceedings in that regard are in the nature of quasi criminal proceedings, the degree of proof required to record a