Disposed

Vipul Mahajan and Anr. v. the Hon. Minister Co-Operatie Societies and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Aug 2021WP/2334/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an ex-parte stay order passed by the Hon'ble Minister without a hearing, the court refused to interfere on merits. It granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the Minister to vacate the stay via an appropriate application while keeping contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to approach the Hon'ble Minister by filing an appropriate application for vacating the stay, with liberty to approach the Court if refused.

Vipul Mahajan and Anr. Vs the Hon. Minister… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

9. WP 2334-21.doc

¶2

DDR

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 2334 OF 2021

¶6

VIPUL MAHAJAN & ANR. ..PETITIONERS VS. THE HON’BLE MINISTER & ORS. ..RESPONDENTS

¶7

Mr. Mayur Agrawal i/b. Dinesh Kumar Gupta for the petitioners.

¶8

CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J.

¶9

DATE : AUGUST 6, 2021

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶12

The petitioners are the members of the Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. It is alleged that there were several irregularities committed by the members of the Managing Committee as regards the functioning of the society. Accordingly a complaint came to be made under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the said Act’ for short) before the District Deputy Registrar. The District Deputy Registrar appointed an administrator. An appeal came to be fled by the Managing Committee members before the Divisional Joint Registrar. The order of the District Deputy Registrar was upheld. The Managing Committee members then fled the revision under Section 154 of the Act before the Hon’ble Minister. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that an

¶13

1 Of 3

¶14

9. WP 2334-21.doc

¶15

administrator had already taken charge on 27/1/2021. He submits that it is thereafter that the Hon’ble Minister by the impugned order stayed the orders passed by the District Deputy Registrar and the Divisional Joint Registrar during the pendency of the revision. It is his contention that the petitioners were not heard and the impugned order was passed without an opportunity to the petitioners to present their case.

¶16

I fnd that the Hon’ble Minister has taken into consideration the fact that the administrator was already appointed. From the order it is seen that the Hon’ble Minister thought it ft to stay the impugned orders as the afairs of the society are at a standstill.

¶17

I am further informed that pursuant to the order passed by the Hon’ble Minister the society has already taken charge from the administrator.

¶18

I do not propose to interfere with the impugned orders as, if it is the contention of the petitioners that they were not heard before the stay was granted by the Hon’ble Minister, it is always open for the petitioners to fle an appropriate application for vacating the stay.

¶19

Liberty to the petitioners to approach the Hon’ble Minister by fling an appropriate application for vacating the stay granted raising a contention that they were not heard before passing the

¶20

2 Of 3

¶21

9. WP 2334-21.doc

¶22

impugned order and order was passed ex-parte.

¶23

All contentions on merits are kept open.

¶24

I have not made any observation on merits of the contentions either ways.

¶25

The Hon’ble Minister to consider the application, if made, on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶26

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶27

(M.S.KARNIK, J.)

¶28

DIKSHA DINESH RANE

¶29

Digitally signed by DIKSHA DINESH RANE Date: 2021.08.06 14:18:18 +0530

¶30

3 Of 3

Vipul Mahajan and Anr. v. the Hon. Minister Co-Operatie Societies and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipul Mahajan and Anr. v. the Hon. Minister Co-Operatie Societies 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

Mrs. Susy Sebastian Vs Jitendra Omprakash Mishra and Ors.

Vimal Builders Vs Janakibai Anant Vaity and Ors.

Shri. Shailesh Haribhau Nikam and Anr. Vs Shri. Ramesh Parshuram Nikam and Ors.

Vasant Haridas Kadam and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vilas Chandrakant Dukare Vs the Additional Commissioner , Konkan Division and Ors.

Shri. Tukaram Pandurang Pawar Vs Divisional Transport Superintendent, State Transport Solapur Competent Authority and Ors.