Disposed

Chief Promoter of Jal Devata, Magasvargiya Matsya Vyavsay Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Latur v. the Minister of State, Fisheries and Others

Bombay HC10 Dec 2014WP/4035/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by Chief Promoter of a cooperative fishing society seeking registration for a water tank where another society allegedly benefited. Bench held grievance must approach competent authority where matter is pending, though leave granted to approach respondent 1.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to petitioner to move appropriate application before Respondent No.1 if grievance subsists after remand to competent authority.

Chief Promoter of Jal Devata, Magasvargiya Matsya… — Cooperative Societies | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

WP 4035.14

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4035/2014

¶5

CHIEF PROMOTER OF JAL DEVATA,
MAGASVARGIYA MATSYA VYAVSAY SAHKARI
SANSTHA MARYADIT, LATUR.

¶6

...PETITIONER...

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS.

¶9

...RESPONDENTS...

¶10

 .....

¶11

Shri Sandeep Swami, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 5.
Respondent no.6 served.

¶12

 .....

¶13

CORAM: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
 A.M. BADAR, JJ.

¶14

DATE: 10.12.2014

¶15

ORDER :

¶16

1]Heard Shri Sandeep Swami, Advocate for Petitioner
and Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 5.
2]Advocate Shri Swami fairly states that learned

¶17

Single Judge has very recently placed back the
controversy before respondent no.1. He contends that

¶18

matter has been sent back on two or three occasions and

¶19

the efforts of petitioner to get itself registered as a

¶20

cooperative fishing society are being frustrated.
According to learned counsel, the respondent no.6 –

¶21

WP 4035.14

¶22

society is getting benefited and on more than one
occasion it got the possession of tank on which
petitioner is seeking registration and the period of five
years of lease granted to it also expired.

¶23

3]Learned AGP appearing for respondent nos.1 to 5
submits that when matter is remanded by learned Single
Judge, there is no question of this Court entertaining
such a petition.

¶24

4]Effort of petitioner is to demonstrate that it is
entitled to seek registration at any time. The moment it
is registered on a particular water tank, that water tank
gets deleted from area of jurisdiction of respondent
no.6.

¶25

5]It is apparent that grievance of this nature cannot

¶26

be looked into by this Court. The matter is pending
before competent authority. Petitioner, therefore, has
to point out his plight to that authority and seek
expeditious disposal. If the request is not being
considered in accordance with law expeditiously, then
petitioner can move competent forum for redressal of its
grievance.

¶27

6]As the matter is remanded back recently, we grant

¶28

WP 4035.14

¶29

petitioner leave to move appropriate application in this
respect before respondent no.1. If thereafter his
grievance subsists, he can raise appropriate grievance in
accordance with law before competent authority.

¶30

7]With said liberty, present petition is disposed of.
No order as to costs.

¶31

ndk/ c10121437.doc

Chief Promoter of Jal Devata, Magasvargiya Matsya Vyavsay Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Latur v. the Minister of State, Fisheries and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chief Promoter of Jal Devata, Magasvargiya Matsya Vyavsay Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Latur v. the Minister of State, Fisheries and Others

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

Gulam Ahmed Gulam Mohammad Vs the Municipal Corp. Abad and Ors.

Vitthal Mahapurao Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Arun Babulal Bharuka and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Maruti Bapurao Lokhande Vs Divisional Controller M.S.R.T.C. Osmanabad Divn. Osmanabad

Dnyaneshwar Shyamrao Dhanwate and Ors. Vs M/S Indo European Breweries Ltd. Aurangabad and Anr.

Sanjay Bhaskar Kale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.