Bombay High Court
Omprakash Bhaurao Kamdi And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra,Thr. Its ... on 29 June, 2022
Bench: S.B. Shukre, G. A. Sanap
CAO.465.21
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
...
CIVIL APPLICATION (O) NO. 465/2021
IN
PUBIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.25/2014 (D)
1) Ompraksh Bhauraoi Kamdi and others ..Petitioner
versus
1) The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
.............................................................................................................
Mr. M.G. Bhangde, Sr.Advocate for original Petitioners/ applicants
Mr. M.V. Samarth, Sr. Advocate for Respondent No.4
Mr.Akshay Naik, Advocate for Respondent No.5
..........................................................................................................
CORAM: SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
G.A. SANAP, JJ
DATED : 29th June, 2022.
P.C. :
Heard learned counsel for respective parties.
2. One of the prayers of this Application is about issuing a
direction to the Inquiry officer, who is conducting an enquiry
under section 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act,
1960, to submit a detailed report/ status of the enquiry which is
going on since the year 2015. Mr. Bhangde,learned senior Advocate
has invited our attention to the order of this Court dated 5 th May
2017 whereby the then Division Bench had observed that in order
to ensure that the enquiry is completed within a reasonable period it
would be appropriate that the learned Inquiry Officer submits
CAO.465.21
periodical reports to this Court. With these observations, the
Division Bench directed that the directions contemplated in that
order of 5th May 2017 would be scrupulously followed by all the
parties concerned.
3. It is, thus, clear that this Court had contemplated that
the enquiry being conducted u/s 88 of the MCS Act would be
completed expeditiously and within a reasonable period of time.
However, to the utter disappointment of all, even after more than
five years since the commencement of the enquiry, the enquiry has
not been completed and the report of the enquiry has not been
submitted. It has been informed across the Bar that presently the
enquiry is pending inasmuch as cross-examination of two witnesses
is going on. Considering the long period which has gone by, we are
of the view that the learned Inquiry Officer now takes appropriate
steps for expeditious conclusion of the enquiry. Of course, there is a
direction passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, on 5 th October
2021 which has been modified subsequently on 13 th May 2022 in
Transfer Petition (s) (Criminal) No(s). 333 -348/2021 to the effect
that though the trial Court may complete the hearing of arguments,
it shall not deliver the judgment. This direction, in our view, would
apply to only criminal trial and there is no dispute about this fact,
inasmuch as all the parties concerned agree to it. Therefore, we do
not think that there would be any impediment in conclusion of the
enquiry u/s 88 of the learned Inquiry officer as expeditiously as
CAO.465.21
possible, which could possibly be on or before the next date of the
hearing of this matter. Of course, all would depend upon the
cooperation of the concerned parties about which this Court has
already observed in its order dated 5 th May 2017 that all the
concerned would render their due cooperation with the Inquiry
Officer.
4. Mr.Naik, learned counsel for Respondent No.5 submits
that the respondent No.5 has already filed an application for
dismissal of the enquiry, it being not maintainable and hearing of
this application has been completed and now the matter is fixed for
passing of order for 30 th June 2022. This submission has been made
by Mr. Naik on the instructions received by him.
5. In view of the above, we would like to defer the hearing
of this Application to the next date.
6. Stand over to 13th July 2022.
7. Steno copy of this order be furnished to all the parties
concerned.
[G.A. SANAP,J.] [SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.]
sahare
Digitally Signed ByNARENDRA
BHAGWANTRAO SAHARE
Location:
Signing Date:29.06.2022 19:17
