JUDGMENT :

Heard Mrs. Smita Deshpande, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Rahul Tajne, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Ms Tajwar Khan, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent/Assistant Registrar. Shri S. R. Dambhare, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is absent.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the rival parties.

3. All these writ petitions, raise an interesting issue regarding the question of territorial jurisdiction of the respondent No. 5 in exercising the powers as vested in him under the various provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short “the MCS Act”, hereinafter).

4. To understand the background, it is necessary to narrate the factual position in brief.

(a) All the petitioners are borrowers of the respondent No. 1-Bank, who have defaulted in the repayment of the borrowings, as a result of which, the respondent No. 1-Bank had initiated action against the petitioners under the provisions of section 101 of the MCS Act.

(b) It is an admitted position, that the respondent No.1-Bank, has Branch Office at Shegaon, where all the petitioners, conduct thei