Case Note & Summary
The present reference arose from a writ petition filed by Shilpchintamani Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. challenging an order dated 21.10.2010 passed by the Minister for Co-operation, State of Maharashtra, while entertaining a second revision application under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act). The petitioner society had initially filed a first revision before the Divisional Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section 154, which was decided. Thereafter, a second revision was filed before the Minister under the same provision. The learned Single Judge, while hearing the writ petition, doubted the correctness of the Full Bench decision in Shireen Sami Gadiali v. Spenta Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., which had held that a second revision under Section 154 is maintainable. The Single Judge referred the matter to a larger Bench, framing the question whether the Full Bench in Shireen Sami Gadiali had correctly answered the question of maintainability of a second revision in light of Supreme Court judgments in Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani v. State of Maharashtra. The Full Bench of the Bombay High Court, consisting of three judges, examined the language of Section 154 and the scheme of the MCS Act. It noted that Section 154 confers revisional power on specified authorities, including the Minister and the Divisional Joint Registrar. The court observed that the power under Section 154 is akin to a revisional power and once exercised by a competent authority, the matter attains finality. Allowing a second revision by a higher authority under the same provision would lead to endless proceedings and defeat the legislative intent. The court further relied on the Supreme Court's decisions in Ishwar Singh and Gurudassing Panjwani, which held that in the absence of an express provision, a second revision is not maintainable. The Full Bench concluded that the earlier Full Bench decision in Shireen Sami Gadiali was erroneous and overruled it. Consequently, the court held that the second revision application filed before the Minister under Section 154 of the MCS Act was not maintainable. The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order dated 21.10.2010 was quashed and set aside.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Law - Second Revision - Maintainability - Section 154, Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The question was whether a second revision application under Section 154 of the MCS Act is maintainable against an order passed by a subordinate revisional authority under the same provision. The Full Bench of the Bombay High Court held that such a second revision is not maintainable, overruling its earlier decision in Shireen Sami Gadiali. The court reasoned that allowing a second revision would lead to endless proceedings and defeat the legislative intent of finality. (Paras 1-15) B) Co-operative Law - Revisional Powers - Scope - Section 154, Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The court examined the scope of revisional powers under Section 154 and held that the power is akin to that of a court of revision, and once exercised, the revisional authority becomes functus officio. A second revision by a higher authority under the same provision is not contemplated. (Paras 10-14) C) Precedent - Overruling - Shireen Sami Gadiali - The Full Bench decision in Shireen Sami Gadiali v. Spenta Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. was overruled as it had erroneously held that a second revision under Section 154 MCS Act is maintainable. The court relied on Supreme Court judgments in Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani v. State of Maharashtra to conclude that the principle against second revisions applies. (Paras 12-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Shireen Sami Gadiali v. Spenta Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. had correctly answered the question concerning maintainability of second revision application under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Ishwar Singh v. State of Rajasthan and Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani v. State of Maharashtra.
Final Decision
The Full Bench held that the second revision application under Section 154 of the MCS Act is not maintainable. The Full Bench decision in Shireen Sami Gadiali v. Spenta Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. was overruled. The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order dated 21.10.2010 passed by the Minister for Co-operation was quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Second revision not maintainable under Section 154 MCS Act
- Revisional authority cannot review its own order
- Full Bench decision in Shireen Sami Gadiali overruled
- Principle of finality in revisional proceedings
