Allowed

Sunil Kantilal Bhandari and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC13 Oct 2021WP/7122/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed Respondent No.4, a cooperative bank, to comply with an order dated 24.03.2021 issued by the Deputy Registrar (Urban Bank) within eight weeks to supply specific documents related to committee minutes to the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.4 to comply with the order dated 24.03.2021 by the Deputy Registrar (Urban Bank) within eight weeks.

Sunil Kantilal Bhandari and Another Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

(1)

¶2

1026-wp-7122-2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.7122 OF 2021

¶5

SUNIL KANTILAL BHANDARI AND ANOTHER..PETITIONERS

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS..RESPONDENTS

¶8

Mr. Suresh P. Salgar h/f Mr. Nitin V. Gaware,
Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for Respondents-State.
Mr. A. V. Hon, Advocate for Respondent No.4.

¶9

 CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &

¶10

 R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

¶11

 DATED : 13th OCTOBER, 2021.

¶12

PER COURT:-

¶13

1.Heard Mr. Salgar, learned counsel for
petitioners and Mr. Hon, learned counsel for
respondent no.4.

¶14

2.The petitioners seek directions against
respondent-Bank to supply the documents as directed
by the Deputy Registrar under order dated
05.03.2021 and 24.03.2021.

¶15

3.Mr. Hon, learned counsel submits that, as
per Section 32 of the Maharashtra Co-operative
Societies Act, 1960 the Bank is under obligation to
permit petitioners to seek inspection and furnish
the documents mentioned therein. The copies of the
minutes of meeting of subject committee are not

¶16

(2) 1026-wp-7122-2021

¶17

covered under Section 32 of the Maharashtra Co-
operative Societies Act, 1960 and as such the same
is not relevant and the order could not have been
passed.

¶18

4.The direction issued by the Deputy
Registrar (Urban Bank) is not challenged by
respondent no.4. Thus the order is passed. The
petitioners had also filed reply on 10.03.2021.
Thereafter, the same order dated 24.03.2021 is
passed. As the same order is not challenged by
respondent no.4, respondent no.4 is bound to comply
with the said order.

¶19

5.In view of that, respondent no.4 shall
comply the order (Page No.29) dated 24.03.2021
passed by the Deputy Registrar (Urban Bank) within
a period of eight weeks and give the copies as
directed therein.

¶20

6.Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶21

(R. N. LADDHA) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA) JUDGE JUDGE

¶22

Devendra/October-2021

Sunil Kantilal Bhandari and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kantilal Bhandari and Another v. the State of Maharashtra 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

Akshada Mangal Karyalaya Parbhani Thr Its Partner Kailash Shankarlal Mantri Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Maharashtra Shikshan Samiti Nilanga through Secretary and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mohamood Abdul Raffiq Mahamood Ibrahim Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sambhaji Murlidhar Tandale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Meghraj Dhondiram Kharatmol Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Alka Shripatrao Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another