IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Bharat P.Deshpande, J.
Vidhi - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1132 of 2024
Decided On : 20-03-2024
RECOVERY - MAHARASHTRA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT - Sec. 101, Rules 86A to 86F - The court discussed the procedural requirements for issuing recovery certificates under Sec. 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, emphasizing the necessity of following the prescribed rules (86A to 86F) for a fair hearing. The court found that the Assistant Registrar failed to conduct a proper inquiry, did not provide the petitioners an opportunity to contest the proceedings, and issued orders without essential details, leading to a lack of due process. This influenced the court's decision to quash the impugned orders and direct a fresh inquiry.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged an order from the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, which issued a recovery certificate under Sec. 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, for loan recovery. The petitioners argued that proper procedures were not followed, including the absence of a case number and the lack of opportunity to contest the order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Assistant Registrar acted without following the necessary procedures outlined in the Act and the Rules. The absence of a case number, the failure to conduct an inquiry, and the lack of opportunity for the petitioners to present their case indicated a violation of the principles of natural justice.
Issues: Whether the Assistant Registrar followed the proper procedures under Sec. 101 and Rules 86A to 86F of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act in issuing the recovery certificate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Assistant Registrar is required to act in a quasi-judicial capacity, which necessitates adherence to procedural fairness and the principles of natural justice. The failure to provide the petitioners with an opportunity to contest the proceedings and the lack of essential details in the order rendered the proceedings invalid.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned orders and directed the Assistant Registrar to conduct a fresh inquiry in accordance with the law, ensuring that the petitioners are given a fair opportunity to present their case.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
3. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsels for the respective parties.
4. Both these matters are filed challenging the order passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Umrer Taluka against the petitioner thereby issuing the recovery certificate under Sec. 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that first of all no procedure has been followed as provided under Rule 86A to 86F and that no case is registered on an application filed by respondent No.2. He submits that though notice was issued to the petitioner to appear on 15/9/2023, the concerned Assistant Registrar, Umrer was himself absent. No opportunity was given to the petitioner to file any reply or contest the said proceedings. He submits that the impugned order is passed mechanically and without application of mind and more specifically such order nowhere show a case number, the date of order or the person who appeared before him on the day when the matter was fixed.
6. Learned AGP would submit that the instructions are awaiting and therefore, the matter could be postponed.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that the applications were filed for recovery of the loan amount and accordingly orders were passed.
8. Sec. 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 read thus:

The court established that disputes involving the authenticity of documents and repayment claims in cooperative society contexts must be resolved in cooperative courts under Sec. 91, rather than thro....
The court reaffirmed that the issuance of Recovery Certificates under Section 101 must follow mandatory procedures, including proper notice and adherence to statutory deposit requirements, vital for ....
The execution of Recovery Certificates under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act is not subject to a strict limitation period if there is an acknowledgment of liability, which can extend the l....
The court established that under the MCS Act, the issuance of recovery certificates involves a summary inquiry focused on the quantification of arrears, and that disputes requiring evidence must be a....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.