Sapna Bohra vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 5354 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5162/2022

Sapna Bohra W/o Sh. Ravi Prakash Bohra, Aged About 53 Years, R/o 145, Galli No. 3, Shyam Nagar, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan, Pin Code 342001.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through The Central Registrar, Ministry Of Agriculture And Farmers Welfare, Department Of Agriculture, Cooperation And Farmers Welfare, Office Of The Central Registrar Of Co-Operative Societies Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi 110001.

2. Adarsh Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd, (Multi State) Through Its M.d. Cum Chairman, Adarsh Bahwan, 14, Vidhya Vihar Colony, Usmanpura, Asharm Road, Ahmedabad - 380013.

3. Liquidator, Adarsh Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. (Multi State) Second Floor, 14, Vidhya Vihar Colony, Usmanpura, Asharm Road, Ahmedabad - 380013.

4. Registrar, Rajasthan Co-Operative Societies, Nehru Sahkar Bhawan, C-Scheme Road, Jaipur Rajasthan.

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :    Ms. Varsha Bissa
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr. Uttam Singh Rajpurohit for
                                 Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, ASG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order

11/04/2022

Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by

the ratio of the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of

this Court in the case of Pinky Agarwal and Ors. Vs. The Union

of India and Ors. in (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.

12298/2020).

(2 of 2) [CW-5162/2022]

1. The limited grievance that the petitioner have raised in this

case is that they had made certain deposits in the respondent

No.3 - Liquidator, Adarsh Credit Co-Operative Society Limited,

No.4 Registrar, Rajasthan Co-Operative Societies respectively

under various schemes and heads, however, subsequently the

respondent No.3 and 4 Establishment respectively have been

closed and a Liquidator was also appointed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that meanwhile

the deposits of other creditors were released, however, the

deposits made by the petitioner were not released. The

petitioner make a limited prayer that the respondents may be

directed to take a decision on the claim application of the

petitioner seeking for release of the amount lying deposited with

the respondent No. 3 and 4 respectively.

3. The limited request made by the petitioner is not opposed

by the learned Assistant Solicitor General.

4. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to take a decision

on the application filed by the petitioner expeditiously preferably

within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of copy of

this order strictly in accordance with rules and guidelines.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

6. Stay application so also interlocutory application(s) stand

disposed of accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

48-payal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)