The main legal point established in the judgment is that statutory remedies available under the rules should be followed for challenging auction sales and sale confirmation certificates.

JUDGMENT

Milind N. Jadhav, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the parties.

2. This common judgement shall dispose of Writ Petition No. 263 of 2016, Writ Petition No. 2940 of 2018, Writ Petition No.5711 of 2017 and Writ Petition No. 12653 of 2017. Writ Petition No. 263 of 2016 has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the legality, validity and proprietary of the order dated 16.12.2015 passed by respondent No.5 i.e. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur in Revision proceedings under the provisions of Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). By the impugned judgment, respondent No.5, has allowed Revision Application No.75 of 2015 filed by respondent No.1 and has set aside the public auction dated 03.05.2014 and Sale Certificate dated 29.06.2015 granted in favour of the petitioner subject to payment of the entire dues of the respondent No.2 Society by the respondent No.1 within a period of one month from the date of the order. The petitioner is the successful auction purchaser in whose favour the sale confirmation / certificate has been issued. Writ Petition No. 263 of 2016 has been filed for the following reliefs :-

a) This Hon'ble Court by issue appropriate writ and or directions to call for the records and proceedings of the Revision application No.75 of 2015 and after perusing its legality, validity and proprietary, be pleased to quash and set aside Impugned Judgment and Order dated 16.12.2015 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, cooperative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur in Revision application No. 75 of 2015;

b) Pending hearing and final disposal of the present writ petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the effect and implementation of Impugned Judgment and Order dated 16.12.2015 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur in Revision application No. 75 of 2015;

c) Ad-interim and interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause (b) above be granted;"

2.1 Writ petition No.263 of 2016 has been filed by the successful auction purchaser, inter alia, challenging the common order dated 16.12.2015 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur in Revision Application No.75 of 2015.

2.2. Writ Petition No.2940 of 2018 has also been filed by the successful auction purchaser, inter alia, challenging the common order dated 16.12.2015 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur in Revision Application No.216 of 2015.

2.3 Writ Petition No.5711 of 2017 has been filed by Sanjivani Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha, Satara Branch through the Special Recovery Officer, Satara Zilha Sahakari Patsanstha Federation, inter alia, challenging the common order dated 16.12.2015 passed by Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Divison, Kolhapur in Revision Application No.216 of 2015.

2.4. Writ Petition No.12653 of 2017 has been filed by Sanjivani Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha, Satara Branch through the Special Recovery Officer, Satara Zilha Sahakari Patsanstha Federation, inter alia challenging the order dated 16.12.2015 passed by Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Kolhapur Divison, Kolhapur in Revision Application No.75 of 2015.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties have chosen to argue W.P.No. 263 of 2016 as the facts in all the four petitions are identical.

4. The brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the lis between the parties are as under :

(A) Respondent No.2 Society granted loan of Rs.5,80,000.00 to respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 failed to repay the loan amount and was declared as defaulter. Respondent No.2 Society filed recovery proceedings against respondent No.1. After following the due process of law, the Registrar issued recovery certificate dated