Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, M/s. Medihealth Care Private Limited and its directors, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Thane, under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The order directed recovery of certain amounts from the petitioners. The petitioners also sought to challenge the recovery proceedings initiated by the respondent bank. The court noted that the petition was filed after a delay of about 10 years from the date of the impugned order. The petitioners' counsel, on instructions, did not press for prayer clause (e) and sought liberty to file a claim against respondent no.1 before the appropriate court. The court observed that the petitioners had an alternative remedy under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and that the writ petition under Article 227 was not maintainable. The court dismissed the petition, granting liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternative remedy available under the Act. The court also granted leave to amend the petition to delete prayer clause (e).
Headnote
A) Co-operative Law - Recovery Proceedings - Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - Challenge to Recovery Certificate - The petitioners challenged the order of the Deputy Registrar under Section 101 of the MCS Act, 1960, which directed recovery of dues. The court held that the petition was not maintainable as the petitioners had an alternative remedy under the Act and the petition was filed after a delay of 10 years. The court dismissed the petition with liberty to the petitioners to avail alternative remedy. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the Deputy Registrar under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is liable to be set aside in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The petitioners are granted liberty to avail the alternative remedy available under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Leave granted to amend the petition to delete prayer clause (e) within one week.
Law Points
- Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
- 1960
- Recovery proceedings
- Writ jurisdiction under Article 227
- Alternative remedy
- Limitation for challenging recovery certificate
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (06) 92
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.15791 OF 2018
Mr. Amrut Joshi with Mr. Ahkil Kusade i/b Manoj Harit & Co. for the Petitioners, Ms. Geeta P. Sonawane, A.G.P. for the State – Respondent No.1, Mr. Vishal Kanade with Mr. Nikhil Rajani i/b V. Deshpande for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4
M/s. Medihealth Care Private Limited, Dr. Kushal Rameshchandra Patel, Dr. Bharati Kushal Patel
State of Maharashtra, Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Thane City Thane, Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Limited, The Recovery Officer
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order passed under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to quash the order dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the Deputy Registrar under Section 101 of the MCS Act, 1960 and to restrain the respondents from recovering the amount.
Filing Reason
The petitioners were aggrieved by the recovery order passed by the Deputy Registrar under Section 101 of the MCS Act, 1960.
Previous Decisions
The Deputy Registrar passed the order on 31st March, 2008 under Section 101 of the MCS Act, 1960.
Issues
Whether the writ petition under Article 227 is maintainable when an alternative remedy is available under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Whether the petition filed after a delay of 10 years should be entertained.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners' counsel did not press prayer clause (e) and sought liberty to file a claim against respondent no.1 before the appropriate court.
The respondents argued that the petition was not maintainable due to alternative remedy and delay.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy is available under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, especially when there is a significant delay in filing the petition.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition filed under section 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned the order dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies under section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Learned counsel for the petitioners on instructions does not press prayer clause (e) of the petition and seek liberty to file appropriate claim against the respondent no.1 before the appropriate Court.
The petition is dismissed. The petitioners are granted liberty to avail the alternative remedy available under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Procedural History
The Deputy Registrar passed the order under Section 101 of the MCS Act on 31st March, 2008. The petitioners filed the writ petition in 2018 challenging that order. The petition was heard on 28th June, 2018 and dismissed.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960: 101
- Constitution of India: 227
