2024:BHC-NAG:1079-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 498 /202 4

1. Pravin S/o Laxmanrao Chakole, Aged about

52 years, Occ. Business.

2. Dipali W/o Pravin Chakole, Aged about

47 years, Occ. Housewife.

Both R/o Plot No.49, Deonagar, Behind Orange City Hospital, Khamla Road, Nagpur. PETITIONERS .....VERSUS..…

1. State of Maharashtra, Through Ministry of Co-op. Societies, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-op Societies, Nagpur.

3. New Subhedar Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd., A registered Society under Maharashtra Co-op.

Societies Act, Through its Recovery Officer, Off. At Plot no.750, New Subhedar Layout, Nagpur – 440 024. R ESPONDENT S Shri S.M. Pande, counsel for the petitioners.

Miss D.V. Sapkal, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, J J .

DATE : JANUARY 22, 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners are the borrowers and accordingly the members of the respondent no.3-New Subhedar Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. (for short, ‘the respondent no.3-Society’), which is a Credit Cooperative Society.

3. The petitioners suffered a recovery certificate under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, ‘the Act of 1960’) for an amount of Rs.1,02,19,685/-. The principal amount which was obtained by the petitioners was Rs.80,00,000/- as on August 16, 2018 which they have failed to repay. After issuance of the aforesaid recovery certificate, the petitioners assured the respondent no.3-Society that they shall be making good the payment within a period of one month as reflected in the communication dated June 28, 2022. According to the petitioners, in view of the policy of the State Government for acceptance of One Time Settlement, the petitioners were willing to deposit the amount.

4. Since the petitioners have neither deposited the outstanding amount nor honoured the dictum under the recovery certificate issued under Section 101 of the Act of 1960, the property of the petitioners, a house, was sought to be auctioned vide advertisement dated December 23, 2023. The petitioners thereafter submitted a proposal for One Time Settlement dated January 12, 2024, however it appears that the petitioners have failed to demonstrate bona fides by depositing the amount. The petitioners thereafter taken out proceedings under Section 154 of the Act of 1960 by invoking revisional jurisdiction. However, it is stated that the respondent-Authorities have refused to register the said proceedings. That being so, the learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed for acceptance of the memo of revision presented by the petitioners and to stay the further proceedings.

5. The aforesaid prayer is objected by the learned Assistant Government Pleader on the ground that for enjoying the interim relief against the recovery sought from the petitioners, they must show their bona fides by depositing 50% of the total outstanding amount.

6. We have appreciated the aforesaid submissions.

7. Section 154 of the Act of 1960 which confers the revisional jurisdiction on the Registrar, in the present case the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, reads as under :-

“154. Revisionary powers of State Government and Registrar (1) The State Government or the Registrar, suo motu or on an application, may call for and examine the record of any inquiry or proceedings of any matter, other than those referred to in sub-section (9) of section 149, where any decision or order has been passed by any subordinate officer, and no appeal lies against such decision or order for the purpose of satisfying themselves as to the legality or propriety of any such decision or order, and as to the regularity of such proceedings. If in any case, it appears to the State Government, or the Registrar, that any decision or order so c