SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Bom) 541

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

Advocates appeared:
Nitin Bhishikar, Advocate, A.V.Palshikar, Advocate, R.K.Thakkar, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
The Assistant Registrar must adhere to the procedural requirements set forth in the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and its Rules when issuing recovery certificates, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice.

Headnote:

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:

    101. [Recovery of certain sums and arrears due to certain societies as arrears of land revenue.] [(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sec. 91, 93 and 98, on an application made by a resource society undertaking the financing of crop and seasonal finance as defined under the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947, [or advancing loans for other agricultural purposes repayable during a period of not less than eighteen months and not more than five years] for the recovery of arrears of any sum advanced by it to any of its members on account of the financing of crop or seasonal finance [or for other agricultural purposes as aforesaid] or by a crop-protection society for the recovery of the arrears of the initial cost or of any contribution for obtaining services required for crop-protection society or for the recovery of the arrears of the initial cost or of any contribution for obtaining services required for crop protection which may be due from its members or other owners of lands included in the proposal (who may have refused to become members) or by a lift irrigation society for the recovery of arrears of any subscription due from its members for obtaining services required for providing water supply to them, [or by a Tulaka or Block level village artisans multipurpose society advancing loans and arranging, for cash credit facilities for artisans for the recovery of arrears of its dues, ] [or [***], by a co-operative dairy society advancing loans for the recovery of arrears of any, sum advanced by it to any of its-members or by an urban co-operative bank for the recovery of arrears of its dues, [or any sum advanced by the District Central Co-operative Bank to its members or by non-agricultural co-operative credit society for the recovery of the arrears, of its dues] or by salary-earners co-operative society for the recovery of arrears of its dues, or by a fisheries co-operative society for the recovery of arrears of its dues, ] [or by any such society or class of societies, as the state Government may from time to time, notify in the Official Gazette, for the recovery of any sum advanced to, or any subscription or any other amount due from, the members of the society or class of societies so not notified;] and [on the society concerned furnishing a statement of accounts and any other documents as may be prescribed] in respect of the arrears, [the Registrar may, after making the inquiry in such manner as may be prescribed, grant a certificate for the recovery of the amount stated therei

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top