Bombay High Court

Ambernath Sahakari Samudayik Shetki ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru. G.P. And ... on 22 October, 2025

                                                                                        5.as.wp.st.14114.2025.doc



                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                                WRIT PETITION NO.14114 OF 2025

                    Ambernath Sahakari Samudayik shetki Society Ltd.
       Digitally
       signed by
                    Through its Chairman Visvass Mhasske                                  .. Petitioner
       VINA
VINA   ARVIND
ARVIND KHADPE
KHADPE Date:
       2025.10.23
       13:08:42
                             Versus
       +0530


                    The State of Maharashtra and ors.                                     .. Respondents

                         Mr. Kunal Damle , a/w Mr. Rupesh R. Lanjekar, Advocates for the
                         Petitioner.

                         Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 to 2 - State.


                                      CORAM:               AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J.

                                      DATE:                OCTOBER 22, 2025
                                                           (Vacation Court)

                    P. C.

1. Heard the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and

the Learned AGP. Mr. Damle submitted that he has served a copy of the

Petition and has given a notice of today's hearing to all the Respondents.

2. By the present Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned

orders dated 4th September, 2025 and 8th October, 2025. The order dated 4 th

September, 2025, is passed by the 2nd Respondent under Section 79(1) of the

Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 ("the Societies Act"). The order

OCTOBER 22, 2025 Vina Khadpe,PS

5.as.wp.st.14114.2025.doc

dated 8th October, 2025, is passed by the 2 nd Respondent under Section 79(2)

(b) of the Societies Act, for non-compliance of the order dated 4 th September,

2025. Both these orders are the subject matter of challenge.

3. Mr. Damle submitted that both the impugned orders are passed in

gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the same are arbitrary.

It is submitted that the hearing in respect of the proceedings initiated under

Section 79(1) of the Act was kept by the 2 nd Respondent on 23rd September,

2025. The Petitioner had intimated the 2 nd Respondent well in advance that

the Petitioner would not be in a position to attend the hearing on 23 rd

September 2025 due to the scheduled hearing of Writ Petition No.1762 of

2025 filed by the Petitioner before the Hon'ble High Court. The 2 nd

Respondent received this intimation, and there is no dispute regarding the

same. Even after the Petitioner's request, the 2 nd Respondent proceeded with

the hearing and subsequently passed the impugned order dated 8 th October,

2025.

4. The Petitioner contends that the 3 rd Respondent is a Member of the

Petitioner Society, who is a defaulter and has persistently made various false

and frivolous complaints against the Petitioner Society. The subject matter of

the complaints also includes the portion of land allotted to the Society, which

OCTOBER 22, 2025 Vina Khadpe,PS

5.as.wp.st.14114.2025.doc

the State Government alleges belongs to it by virtue of a mutation entry made

in the name of the State Government. A plot measuring 20 acres is now

designated by the State Government for a Medical College by virtue of the

mutation entry. It is submitted by the Petitioner that the Writ Petition filed

by the Petitioner challenges the Government Resolution dated 23 rd February,

2023. This Hon'ble Court heard the Petitioner's Writ Petition on 6 th October

2025, and an ad-interim relief came to be granted in favour of the Petitioner.

The Court has directed the State Government not to act in any manner on the

said Government Resolution. The operative part of the order dated 6 th

October, 2025 reads as under :-

"3. In view of the above and considering the order of this Court dated 11th January, 2011, we direct the concerned Respondents not to act in any manner which runs counter to the order dated 11 th January, 2011. In the event any of the Respondents desire that the said order be modified, they are at liberty to approach the Appropriate Court."

5. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner also relied upon the papers and

proceedings of LPA No.10 of 2011 filed by the Petitioner Society. By the said

LAP, the Petitioner has challenged the resumption of the entire land of 210

Acres. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has also invited my attention

to the interim order passed on 11th January, 2011, in LPA No.10 of 2011, by

which this Court had directed the State Government not to disturb the

possession of the Petitioner Society.

OCTOBER 22, 2025 Vina Khadpe,PS

5.as.wp.st.14114.2025.doc

6. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that Respondent No.3, has

persistently made frivolous complaints against the Petitioner Society with

malafide intentions. Mr. Damle submitted that apart from the violation of the

principles of natural justice, the order passed by the 2 nd Respondent is

outside the scope and jurisdiction of the 2 nd Respondent under Section 79(1)

of the Act. According to Mr. Damle the information and the documents

sought by the 2nd Respondent are only to help the 3 rd Respondent. He

submitted that the Petitioner has already provided an explanation and

submitted the required documents in reply to the complaints filed by the 3 rd

Respondent. Mr Damle cited judgment of the Nagpur Bench of this court in

Aniruddha Subhanrao Deshmukh and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

(2023) 1 Mah LJ 647, and more particularly on paragraphs Nos.13, 14, 15,

and 16. It is submitted that the order passed on 4 th September, 2025, and the

directions given by the 2nd Respondent to produce the documents at page

No.9 of the order, are fishing enquiries and are entirely outside the scope and

jurisdiction of the 2nd Respondent under Section 79(1) of the Act.

7. The Learned AGP appearing on behalf of the 1 st and 2nd Respondent

opposed the application of the Petitioner for ad interim reliefs. He submitted

that the order is passed in accordance with the provisions of law. There are

many complaints against the Petitioner, and therefore, the information and

OCTOBER 22, 2025 Vina Khadpe,PS

5.as.wp.st.14114.2025.doc

documents ordered to be submitted by the 2 nd Respondent are justified and

are within the scope of the provisions of Section 79(1) of the Act. He

submitted that the time be granted to file a detailed reply to oppose the ad

interim reliefs.

8. After hearing both parties, I find that the hearing of proceedings was

conducted by the 2nd Respondent under Section 79(1) of the Act on 23rd

September 2025 without hearing the Petitioner. The Petitioner's request

seeking adjournment in the matter, which the 2 nd Respondent did not

entertain. Further, Prima facie, there is substance in the argument of the

Petitioner that there was no reason for the 2nd Respondent not to accept the

request of the Petitioner to adjourn the hearing, which was scheduled on 23 rd

September 2025. Prima facie, the documents and information sought by the

2nd Respondent by his order dated 4th September 2025 are outside the scope,

power and authority of Section 79(1) of the Act. Also, the subject matter of

the complaints filed by the 3rd Respondent also includes the subject matters

which are pending before the Hon'ble Court in the above-referred Writ

Petition and the LPA in which this Hon'ble Court has already protected the

Petitioner by way of interim orders.

OCTOBER 22, 2025 Vina Khadpe,PS

5.as.wp.st.14114.2025.doc

9. Therefore, there shall be relief in terms of prayer clause (b), which

reads as follows :-

b. That during the pendency of the present petition this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the execution, effect and implementation of order dated 04.09.2025 and 08.10.2025 passed by the Respondent No.2 which are at "Exh-C" and "Exh-I".

10. The Respondents shall file their respective Replies to the Petition

within a period of three weeks from today. A copy of the reply shall be served

to the Petitioner on or before 11 th November, 2025. Rejoinder, if any, shall be

filed by the Petitioner within one week thereafter.

11. Place the matter on board on 28th November 2025, under the caption

"for directions", The ad interim relief shall continue to operate up to 30 th

November 2025.

12. At this stage, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner sought

leave to amend the Petition on the ground that the Petitioner has received the

Show Cause Notice under Section 73(c)(a)(3) of the Societies Act for the

disqualification of the Committee of the Petitioner-Society. The said Notice

OCTOBER 22, 2025 Vina Khadpe,PS