Dismissed

Shri Basaweshwar Vividh Karyakari Co-Op. Society Ltd, through Chairman, Shri. Sadashiv R. Chougule v. Union of India, through Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Bombay HC19 Jun 2014WP/2707/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Petition No.2707 of 2014 with Civil Application No.1506 of 2014, the High Court of Bombay heard a challenge regarding a loan waiver scheme. The court rejected the petition, holding that despite some members leaving the society, they were members when the benefit was extended, drawing the case parallel to prior orders.

What did the court decide?

Civil Application No.1506 of 2014 allowed regarding amendment within two weeks; Writ Petition No.2707 of 2014 rejected.

Shri Basaweshwar Vividh Karyakari Co-Op. Society Ltd, through Chairman, Shri. Sadashiv R. Chougule Vs Union of India, through Ministry of Finance and Ors. — Bombay HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

wp-2707.14

pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.2707 OF 2014 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1506 OF 2014 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2707 OF 2014

¶6

Shri Basaweshwar Vividh Karyakari Coop. Society Ltd. … Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Union of India and others … Respondents

¶9

¶10

Mr. Suresh Madhukar Kamble,for the Petitioner Applicant. Mr. G.R. Sharma, Mr. H.V. Mehta, Mr. A.R. Varma a/w Mr. D.P. Singh, for Respondent No.1.

¶11

Mr. S.R. Ganbavale, for the Respondent No.3.

¶12

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

¶13

DATE : 19^th JUNE, 2014

¶14

P.C.

¶15

. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and

¶16

the learned counsel appearing for the concerned Respondents. We allow the Civil Application No.1506 of 2014 in terms of prayer clause (a). Necessary amendment shall be carried out within a period of two weeks.

¶17

When attention of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner is invited to order dated 29th April, 2014 passed by this Court

¶18

1 of 2

¶19

2 wp-2707.14

¶20

in Writ Petition No.7234 of 2013 and other Petitions, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that there is a distinguishing factor as far as this case is concerned. He pointed out that 23 members of the Petitioner who have been granted the benefit of loan waiver scheme are no longer the members of the Petitioner society and they have joined some other society.

¶21

However, it is not in dispute that the said 23 persons were the members of the Petitioner society when the benefit of loan waiver scheme was extended to them. Hence, we do not agree that the case of the Petitioner is different from the cases of the Petitioners which are decided under the Judgment and Order dated 29th April, 2014. Hence, for the reasons recorded in the said Judgment and Order and subject to the observations made therein, the Petition is rejected.

¶22

2 of 2

Shri Basaweshwar Vividh Karyakari Co-Op. Society Ltd, through Chairman, Shri. Sadashiv R. Chougule v. Union of India, through Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Basaweshwar Vividh Karyakari Co-Op. Society Ltd, through Chairman, Shri. Sadashiv R. Chougule v. Union of India, through Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Appasaheb Akapa Khotale and Ors. Vs Shri. Prabhakar Kallu Khot and Ors.

Arya Agrotech Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State Bank of India, through Bank Branch Manager and Anr.

Sharad Narayan Ghante Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Tribunal Development Department and Ors.

Shri. Sakharam Mahadev Jadhav Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Kulgaon-Badkapur Nagarparishad, Kulgaon and Ors.

Shri. Bhaskar Govind Bhong and Ors. Vs the Secretary, the State Transport Authority and Ors.

Govind Alias Bhgi Ganesh Tilve Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.