Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Shripati Laxman Patil, Ku. Deepali Shripati Patil, and Smt. Rajani Shripati Patil, filed three separate writ petitions challenging an order dated 10 December 2020 passed by the learned Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai Division, in Revision Application Nos.444 of 2018, 445 of 2018, and 446 of 2018. The background of the case involves recovery certificates issued under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, on 29 March 2004, for amounts of Rs.9,28,829/-, Rs.2,86,117/-, and Rs.1,43,486/- respectively. These certificates had attained finality as they were never challenged. Subsequently, a Demand Notice dated 12 June 2014 was issued by the Special Recovery Officer under Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961. The petitioners filed Revision Application No.357 of 2014 against that notice, which was disposed of by an order dated 20 September 2014, setting aside the demand notice and remanding the matter back to the Special Recovery Officer for fresh consideration. Thereafter, the petitioners filed the revision applications that led to the impugned order, challenging the recovery certificates themselves. The Divisional Joint Registrar dismissed those revision applications, leading to the present writ petitions. The legal issues before the High Court were whether the Divisional Joint Registrar was justified in dismissing the revision applications without considering the merits of the petitioners' objections. The petitioners argued that the Registrar ought to have examined their objections on merits. The respondents contended that the recovery certificates had attained finality. The High Court analyzed the matter and found that the impugned order did not consider the petitioners' contentions. The Court held that the Registrar should have examined the objections on merits and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The decision was to allow the writ petitions, set aside the impugned order, and remand the revision applications back to the Divisional Joint Registrar for a fresh hearing on merits.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Law - Recovery Certificates - Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - Revision - The petitioners challenged recovery certificates issued under Section 101 of the Act. The Divisional Joint Registrar dismissed their revision applications without considering the merits of their objections. The High Court held that the Registrar ought to have examined the objections on merits and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. (Paras 1-10) B) Co-operative Law - Demand Notice - Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 - Remand - The petitioners had earlier filed a revision against a demand notice, which was allowed and remanded. However, the subsequent revision against the recovery certificates was dismissed. The High Court found that the Registrar failed to consider the petitioners' contentions and set aside the impugned order, directing a fresh hearing. (Paras 4-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Divisional Joint Registrar was justified in dismissing the revision applications filed by the petitioners challenging the recovery certificates without considering the merits of their objections.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned order dated 10 December 2020, and remanded the revision applications back to the Divisional Joint Registrar for a fresh hearing on merits.
Law Points
- Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
- 1960
- Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules
- 1961
- Revision jurisdiction
- Remand
- Natural justice
