Bombay High Court
Vilas Tukaram Magdum And Ors vs Ministry Of Co-Operation Govt Of ... on 4 October, 2024
Author: A.S. Chandurkar
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
2024:BHC-AS:39201-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13671 OF 2024
1. Vilas Tukaram Magdum ]
2. Ganpati Raghu Magdum ]
3. Krushnath Bhau Padale ]
4. Ajit Annaso Patil ]
5. Joti Bhau Hindule ]
6. Tanaji Tukaram Chavan ]
7. Satabai Daji Bodake ]
8. Nanaso Chandar Benke ]
9. Annapa Narayan Bodke ]
10. Suresh Maruti Magdum ] .. Petitioners
Versus
1. Ministry of Co-operation, ]
Maharashtra State ]
2. Shri Vithal Sahakari Pani Purvatha Sanstha ]
Maryadit Daryache Vadgaon, Dist. Kolhapur ]
3. Divisional Joint Registrar, ]
Co-operative Societies, Kolhapur Division ]
4. Assistant Registrar, ]
Co-operative Societies, Karveer, Dist. Kolhapur ]
5. Pradeep Malgave ]
Authorized Inquiry Officer, ]
Shri Vithal Sahakari Pani Purvatha Sanstha ]
Maryadit Daryache Vadgaon, Karveer, Kolhapur ]
6. Bindu Ramchandra More (Deceased) ]
7. Laxmi Rami Sasane (Deceased) ] .. Respondents
Mr. Manoj A. Patil, i/by Ms. Kalyani M. Mangave, Advocate for the
Petitioners.
Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, Assistant Government Pleader for the Respondent-
State of Maharashtra.
Mr. Prashant Bhavake, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 5.
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR &
RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ
DATE : 4TH OCTOBER 2024.
Digitally
signed by
SNEHA
1/4
SNEHA ABHAY 905-WP-13671-2024.doc
ABHAY DIXIT
DIXIT Date:
2024.10.04
Dixit
18:10:04
+0530
::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 05/10/2024 00:51:00 :::
ORAL JUDGMENT : { Per A.S. Chandurkar, J. }
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned counsel for
the parties.
2. The challenge raised in this writ petition is to the order dated 24 th
September 2024 passed by the Hon'ble Minister, Co-operation in Revision
Application No.208 of 2024 preferred by the respondent no.2 herein. The
respondent no.2 had approached this Court in Writ Petition No.12848 of
2024 (Vitthal Sahakari Pani Purvatha Sanstha Maryadit Daryache
Vadgaon, through Chairman Ramesh R. Chavan Vs. The Hon. Minister
Department and Ors.) and on 12th September 2024, the following
directions came to be issued :-
"3. Considering the fact that the revision application has
been filed by the petitioner on 13 th February 2024, it is
directed that the stay application in the said
proceedings shall be decided on its own merits and in
accordance with law.
4. The parties shall appear before the respondent no.1 on
19th September 2024. The petitioner shall intimate this
aspect to respondent nos.4 to 16. The stay application
shall be decided within a period of two weeks from
the said date. The petitioner shall serve a copy of this
order on the respondent no.1 as well as the
respondent nos.4 to 16 to enable them to take steps
accordingly."
905-WP-13671-2024.doc
Dixit
3. The grievance raised by the petitioners is that 24 th September 2024
was the first date fixed for hearing of the proceedings. On that day, an
application seeking supply of necessary documents was submitted on
behalf of the petitioners. Without those documents being supplied, the
Hon'ble Minister passed an order and a direction has been issued that
within a period of eight days, written submissions be filed. On that basis,
the proceedings were closed for passing orders. It is the grievance of the
petitioners that the relevant documents were supplied by the revision
applicant on 25th September 2024, after the proceedings were closed. He
therefore submits that no reasonable opportunity was granted to the
petitioners. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent
no.2 submits that time of eight days was granted to submit written
arguments and hence principles of natural justice were complied with.
4. It is seen from the record that 24 th September 2024 was the first
date of the said proceedings when the petitioners demanded documents
filed along with the Revision Application. Without considering that
application, the Hon'ble Minister closed the proceedings for passing
orders. The necessary documents were supplied on the next day. In our
view, reasonable opportunity ought to be given to the parties in order to
enable consideration of their respective stands. The direction issued on
24th September 2024 is in breach of principles of natural justice and is
liable to be set aside.
905-WP-13671-2024.doc
Dixit
5. Accordingly, the following order is passed :-
(a) The order dated 24th September 2024 passed in
Revision Application No.208 of 2024 is set aside.
(b) The petitioners shall file their reply to the stay
application within a period of one week from today.
(c) The Hon'ble Minister can hear the parties on the stay
application on 11th October 2024 or on any other
convenient date with due notice to the parties.
(d) The time to decide the stay application is accordingly
extended for a further period of four weeks from
today.
(e) All points on merits are kept open.
6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. The writ petition is
disposed of.
[ RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]
905-WP-13671-2024.doc
Dixit
