Allowed

Dattatraya Damodhar Waghchoure v. the Block Education Officer and Others

Bombay HC25 Jul 2018WP/10501/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the rejection of a recovery request under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and remitted the matter for fresh consideration citing the applicable statutory provision.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned order dated 01.01.2015 and remittance of the matter to Respondent No. 1 for re-hearing.

Dattatraya Damodhar Waghchoure Vs the Block Education… — Cooperative Societies | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

914wp10501o15

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 10501 OF 2015

¶5

DATTATRAYA DAMODHAR WAGHCHOURE

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER AND OTHERS

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : Shri A.R.Tapse h/f Shri Suryawanshi Prashant D..

¶9

AGP for Respondent 5 : Shri B.A.Shinde.

¶10

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

¶11

DATE :- 25^th July, 2018

¶12

Per Court:

¶13

1 None appears for Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. This Court has permitted the Petitioner to delete Respondent No.4.

¶14

2 I have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner and the

¶15

learned AGP appearing on behalf of Respondent No.5.

¶16

3 The grievance of the Petitioner is that after the Cooperative Court delivered it's award on 28.03.2011 in Dispute No.16/2008, this Petitioner approached the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies under Section 156(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short "the MCS Act") for seeking appropriate orders for recovery

¶17

of the amount of Rs.2,15,521/- from Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 in this petition.

¶18

2 914wp10501o15

¶19

By the impugned order dated 01.01.2015, Respondent No.1

¶20

has declined to entertain the communication dated 10.11.2014 by which, the Recovery Officer had sought deduction in the salaries of 12 persons mentioned in the said list.

¶21

4 I find from the impugned order that Respondent No.1 has expressed a view that there is no direction by the Cooperative Court to cause a recovery of the amounts from the said 12 persons by attaching their salaries to the extent of the amounts mentioned in the communication of the Recovery Officer.

¶22

5 I also find that Section 156(1)(a) of the MCS Act was not brought to the notice of Respondent No.1. As such, being oblivious of the said provision, Respondent No.1 has tried to search for the source of the power to issue such directions. Had the said provision been pointed out to him, he would have applied his mind.

¶23

6 In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 01.01.2015 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to Respondent No.1 for re-hearing.

¶24

7 The litigating sides shall appear before Respondent No.1 on 06.08.2018 at 11:00 am. In the event, any Respondent does not appear, Respondent No.1 may issue notice to them for causing their appearance.

¶25

8 Needless to state, Respondent No.1 shall hear all the litigating sides and pass an appropriate order as expeditiously as possible and in any

¶26

¶27

914wp10501o15

¶28

case, on or before 15.10.2018.

¶29

9 It is expected that Respondent No.1 would consider the request of the Recovery Officer in view of the communications dated 10.11.2014 and 31.12.2014, in the light of Section 156(1)(a) of the MCS Act.

¶30

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

¶31

kps

Dattatraya Damodhar Waghchoure v. the Block Education Officer and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dattatraya Damodhar Waghchoure v. the Block Education Officer and Others

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

Ganeshrao Tukaramji Jare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Udhalsingh Dhansingh Golwal and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shri Samarth Vidya Prasarak Mandal through Its President D R Kulkarni and Another Vs Sudhakar Pralhad Kulkarni and Another

Abdul Hamid Abdul Kadir Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Panchakki, Aurangabad and Others

Chandrasen Vallabhji Chauthani and Others Vs the Joint Charity Commissioner Nashik and Others

Azim Abdul Hamid Tamboli and Ors. Vs Sachin S/O Manoj Narang