Bombay High Court
Gorakh Ishwar Dhone vs State Of Maharashtra Throu. Govt ... on 8 October, 2025
Author: Amit Borkar
Bench: Amit Borkar
2025:BHC-AS:43573
61-rpw151-2025 in wp12579-2024 & connected.doc
AGK
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION NO.151 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12579 OF 2024
Gorakh Ishwar Dhone ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.156 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12620 OF 2024
Digitally
signed by
ATUL
Ramkeval Rajaram Chaurasia ... Petitioner
ATUL GANESH
GANESH KULKARNI
KULKARNI Date:
2025.10.09
V/s.
14:33:23
+0530 State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.152 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12577 OF 2024
Deepa Bharat Rane ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.155 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12584 OF 2024
Murlidhar Maruti Dhone ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.157 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12582 OF 2024
1
::: Uploaded on - 09/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 00:22:07 :::
61-rpw151-2025 in wp12579-2024 & connected.doc
Bakelal Ramsagar Mishra ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.153 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12583 OF 2024
Surekha Ravikant Yadav ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.154 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12585 OF 2024
Pratika Vijay Keni ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION NO.158 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12576 OF 2024
Pramod Upendra Chaudhary ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.25350 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12580 OF 2024
Ravikant Namdev Yadav ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.25351 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.9442 OF 2024
2
::: Uploaded on - 09/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 00:22:07 :::
61-rpw151-2025 in wp12579-2024 & connected.doc
Shilpa Pravin Jadhav ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.25355 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12581 OF 2024
Shangar Singh & Anr. ... Petitioners
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.25357 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.12578 OF 2024
Vilas Jagannath Katkar ... Petitioner
V/s.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Vaibhav Ugle with Mr. Vikas Somawanshi, and Mr.
Santosh Shukla for the petitioner in all Review
Petitioners and for respondent Nos.5 & 6 in all WPs.
Mr. Mahindra Deshmukh for respondent Nos.2 and 3 in
all Review Petitions.
Ms. Shraddha Nagaonkar with Mr. Sagar Shetty for
respondent Nos.4 to 6 in all Review Petitions.
Mr. J.P. Patil, AGP for State in all Review Petitions.
Mrs. P.G. Gavhane, AGP for RWP/12585/2024.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED : OCTOBER 8, 2025
P.C.:
1. Since all these review petitions arise from the same set of
facts and questions of law, they are being decided together by this
common judgment and order.
61-rpw151-2025 in wp12579-2024 & connected.doc
2. In each of these petitions, the petitioner seeks review of the
judgment and order dated 1 August 2024 passed by this Court,
mainly on the ground that the basis on which the writ petitions
were disposed of is contrary to the settled principles of law.
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present review
petitions are as follows. The petitioners claim to be purchasers of
certain units in the building constructed by respondent No.2-
society. They filed applications before the Assistant Registrar under
Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960,
seeking membership of the respondent-society. The Assistant
Registrar, after considering the registered sale deeds executed in
their favour by the developer, granted them membership.
4. The society challenged these orders before the Revisional
Authority. The Revisional Authority dismissed the revisions.
Consequently, the society filed writ petitions before this Court. By
judgment and order dated 1 August 2024, this Court allowed the
writ petitions, holding that the petitioners had failed to produce
copies of applications made to the society for obtaining
membership, and that their claim regarding issuance of share
certificates by the society was not substantiated. This Court further
observed that if share certificates had in fact been issued, it would
indicate pre-existing membership. In such a situation, the Assistant
Registrar could not have exercised powers under Section 22(2) of
the MCS Act. Accordingly, the orders granting membership were
set aside.
61-rpw151-2025 in wp12579-2024 & connected.doc
5. The petitioners have now filed the present review petitions
contending that, despite a finding in the earlier judgment
indicating pre-existence of membership, the society is not
recognizing them as members. It is urged that their claim of
membership has been rejected on the ground that share certificates
already exist, yet they are simultaneously deprived of the benefits
arising from such share certificates.
6. The learned Advocate for the society has opposed the review
petitions. It is submitted that the exercise of powers under Section
22(2) requires an application to be made by the concerned person
to the society for membership, which the petitioners failed to
submit. It is further contended that the share certificates relied
upon by the petitioners are forged and fabricated documents.
Hence, the petitioners are not entitled to claim any benefit or
recognition on the basis of such documents.
7. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and on
careful examination of the entire record, this Court finds that the
submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners are well
supported by the material available. The review petitions,
therefore, deserve to be allowed for the reasons recorded herein.
8. The grievance of the petitioners that the society, while
relying on the earlier judgment, refuses to acknowledge them as
members despite the finding of pre-existing membership, is
justified. This has created a legal vacuum where the petitioners are
neither recognized as members nor permitted to assert their rights
as purchasers. Such a situation runs contrary to the intent of the
61-rpw151-2025 in wp12579-2024 & connected.doc
MCS Act, which aims to secure the rights of lawful purchasers and
ensure fair functioning of cooperative societies.
9. The principles governing the exercise of review jurisdiction
are well established. A review is maintainable when there is an
error apparent on the face of the record, or when material
evidence has been overlooked. The contradiction in the earlier
judgment between the finding of pre-existing membership and the
ultimate conclusion denying such membership amounts to an error
apparent on the face of the record. Correction of such an error is
not only permissible but necessary to prevent miscarriage of
justice.
10. In light of the evidence on record, including registered sale
deeds, verified admission procedures, and undisputed share
certificates, this Court finds that the earlier judgment proceeded
on an inconsistent and legally unsustainable reasoning.
11. For these reasons, this Court holds that sufficient grounds
exist for review. The contradiction in the earlier judgment requires
correction to uphold justice and consistency in the record.
12. Accordingly, the review petitions are allowed. The judgment
and order dated 1 August 2024 in the writ petitions are recalled.
13. The respective writ petitions are restored on the file of this
Court for decision on merits.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
