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

2025 Supreme(Bom) 176

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
Shri. Sayajirao Narayan Takwane - Appellant
Versus
Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 544 of 2025, With Writ Petition No. 12451 of 2024
Decided On : 04-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Sandeep S. Salunkhe, for the Petitioner in WP-12451/2024 and for
Respondent No.4 in WP-544-2025.
Mr. Drupad S. Patil with Ms. Srushti Chalke for the Petitioner in WP544/2025 and for Respondent No.3 to 13 in WP-12451/2024.
Mr. Bapusaheb Dahiphale, AGP for Respondent-State in WP-544/2025.
Ms. Vrishali Raje, AGP for Respondent-State in WP-12451/2024.

Findings in re-audit reports under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act do not constitute a 'decision' or 'order' and are not subject to revision under Section 154.

Headnote:

(A) Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - Sections 81, 82, 83, 88, and 154 - Maintainability of revision against re-audit report - The court held that findings in re-audit reports do not constitute a 'decision' or 'order' and are not challengeable under Section 154. The Registrar's orders for re-audit are administrative and not quasi-judicial. (Paras 47, 49)

(B) Jurisdiction of Registrar - The Registrar's power to direct re-audit is administrative, and findings in audit reports do not affect rights directly, thus not subject to revision. (Paras 30, 46)

Facts of the case:
The Society challenged the Divisional Joint Registrar's order setting aside a re-audit report and directing a fresh re-audit, arguing that the revision was not maintainable against mere findings. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the revision application against the re-audit report was not maintainable, and the Divisional Joint Registrar's order was set aside. (Paras 50)

Issues: The main issue was whether the findings in the re-audit report constituted a 'decision' under Section 154 of the Act. (Paras 18, 49)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that findings in audit reports do not constitute a 'decision' and are not revisable under Section 154, emphasizing the administrative nature of the Registrar's orders. (Paras 47, 48)

Result: The order dated 2 August 2024 was set aside, and the revision application was held to be not maintainable.

JUDGMENT :

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

1) Chapter VIII of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (the Act) contains elaborate provisions for audit, inquiry, inspection and supervision of accounts of cooperative societies. Sections 81 of the Act provides for conduct of audit, test audit, re-audit, etc and also for submission of specific report for lodging of FIR and special report for conduct of inquiry into working and financial conditions of the society. Various types of reports submitted by the auditor are then subjected to elaborate process by the Registrar and such actions of the Registrar ultimately govern the rights and liabilities of the affected parties. Issues have repeatedly cropped up before this Court about the nature of orders passed by the Registrar directing conduct of test audit or re-audit as well as about mere findings in audit report assuming characteristics of a ‘decision’ or not. The law on the subject has sufficiently evolved.

2) While the short issue arising for consideration in the present case about maintainability of revision under Section 154 of the Act against mere findings in the report of re-audit is squarely covered by various judgments of this Court and these Petitions could ordinarily have been decided in the light of ratio of those judgments, reliance by one of the rival parties on a judgment of this Court in support of his contention that revision would be maintainable even against re-audit report has necessitated detailed discussion in this judgment for reconciliation of the views expressed in that judgment and for achieving better clarity on the issue at hand.

A. THE CHALLENGE

3) The issue arises on account of challenge set up by Pargaon Vividh Karyakari Seva Sanshta Ltd. (Society), who is the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 12451 of 2024 challenging the order dated 2 August 2024 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Pune Division, Pune partly allowing the Revision Application No. 418 of 2023 and setting aside the re-audit report dated 15 September 2023, further directing conduct of fresh re-audit into the accounts of the Society. It is the contention of the Society that Revision is not maintainable against the mere opinion expressed by the Auditor after conducting re-audit under the provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 81 of the Act and that therefore the impugned order of the Divisional Joint Registrar dated 2 August 2024 is without jurisdiction and hence a nullity.

4) The re-audit report, assessing the losses suffered by the Society at Rs. 33,76,111/-, has been acted upon by the Registrar by appointing Enquiry Officer under Section 88 of the Act, who in turn has passed order dated 27 September 2024 apportioning the loss of Rs. 33,76,111/- amongst members of previous managing committee. Those members of managing committee filed appeal before the Divisional Joint Registrar challenging the Enquiry Officer’s order, which is dismissed on account of pendency of Society’s Writ Petition No. 12451 of 2024. One of the members of previous managing committee has accordingly filed Writ Petition No. 554/2025 challenging rejection of appeal by the Divisional Joint Registrar. Since both the petitions involve interconnected issues, they are taken up for hearing together.

B. FACTS

5) The Padgaon Vividh Karyakari Seva Sanstha Ltd is a Society registered under the provisions of the Act having its area of operation in Daund Tehsil of Pune District. During the period 2016 to 2021, Shri. Dnyandev Krushnaji Botre functioned as Chairman of the Society whereas Respondents Nos. 4 to 12 in Writ Petition No. 12451 of 2024 functioned as members of its managing committee. For the sake of brevity and convenience, Respondent Nos. 3 to 12 are together referred hereinafter as ‘previous managing committee members.’ It is the case of the Society that the previous managing committee had appointed Bandu Abaji Bhodve as Head of Irrigation Department of the Society during 1 August 2015 to 31 May 202

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