Dismissed

Rohit Devdatta Hankare v. the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee NO.2, Kolhapur and Ors.

Bombay HC2 Feb 2012WP/549/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the State Government's decision not to make an interim order for winding up a cooperative society. The Court held that mere non-compliance with audit or account maintenance obligations did not warrant winding up.

What did the court decide?

The petition challenging the revocation of interim winding up orders is dismissed; all other contentions regarding powers under the MCS Act remain intact.

Rohit Devdatta Hankare Vs the Divisional Caste… — Company and Corporate | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

wp59-12.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.59 OF 2012

¶5

Pandurang Haridas Survase .. Petitioner Versus The Mohol Taluka Sahakari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Dist. Solapur & Ors. .. Respondents

¶6

Mr.Vijay Killedar for petitioner

¶7

Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate i/b. Niranjan P. Shimpi for respondent No.1

¶8

Ms.P.S.Cardozo, AGP for respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

¶9

CORAM : S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. 27^th SEPTEMBER 2012.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1] The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the State Government

¶12

in Revision Application pursuant to which two orders, one which was passed on 15^th April 2010 and confirmed by the Appellate Authority have been set aside.

¶13

2] What has been held, according to Mr.Killedar appearing for petitioner and that too concurrently is that the Mohol Taluka Sahakari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal is a registered cooperative society. It also claims registration under Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. However, the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies Mohol has found that a case is made out under section 102 (1)(c) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 for initiating suo motu winding up proceedings. An interim order was made and which has been

¶14

¶15

wp59-12.doc

¶16

confirmed by him. That confirmation is upheld by the Divisional Joint Registrar in Appeal. In both orders what has been referred to is that the society has failed to carry out its obligations and particularly of having an audit of its accounts complying with the provisions of the Cooperative Societies Act and equally those in the management have expired. There is such a vacuum which cannot be filled in, save and except by having the affairs of the society wound up.

¶17

3] Such an order should not have been interfered with by the Minister is the submission of Mr.Killedar. However, what has been held by the Minister of Cooperation and Textiles in the Revisional Order dated 7^th September 2011, which is impugned in this petition is that the Sanstha is registered, both under the MCS Act as also under the Bombay Public Trust Act. The Sanstha / Institution has established many schools in which there are students who are imparted education. While it is true that the MCS Act and provisions in relation to audit have not been complied with but the inspection revealed that there has been audit of accounts. That apart, merely because audit has not been carried out or the accounts are not audited or the books have not been maintained is not enough to pass an interim order winding up the society and confirming it.

¶18

4] To my mind, the Minister has committed no error in arriving at a conclusion that this is not a fit case where an interim order under section 102 of the MCS Act was required to be made. A case for winding up is not made out

¶19

¶20

wp59-12.doc

¶21

merely because there is a failure to discharge statutory obligations and carrying out audit of the accounts and maintenance of proper books of accounts. There are enough powers under the MCS Act assuming such is the case and thus it can be taken care of. To my mind, irrespective of what the Minister has observed, the Authorities under the MCS Act can proceed to take such measures and resort to such powers so as to deal with the situation of the society failing to comply with the terms and conditions of its registration or provisions of the Act, including in relation to carrying on statutory regular audit. All contentions in that behalf and equally the powers are kept intact. Additionally, I clarify that the order passed by the Minister and any observations therein will not prevent the authorities from taking requisite and necessary steps, including conducting of elections by resorting to the powers conferred under the MCS Act and by laws of the society. Keeping all such courses open but finding that a case was not made out for passing a drastic order of winding up, that this petition is dismissed. No costs.

Rohit Devdatta Hankare v. the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee NO.2, Kolhapur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Devdatta Hankare v. the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee NO.2, Kolhapur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Mangesh Nivrutti Kashid

Shri. Birsingh Lachhiram Parchha Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Mangesh Nivrutti Kashid

Sou. Mangal Tanaji Chavan Vs the Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee NO.2, Kolhapur and Ors.

Suresh Nana Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, General Administration Dept and Ors.

Sushant Memorial Education Soceityand Ors,. Vs Shri Samarth Education Society