RATANJI S DESAI AND ORSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. THE GOVT PLEADER AND ORS

Neeta Sawant                                                  13-WP-11391-2026.docx


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                            WRIT PETITION NO. 11391 OF 2026


Ratanji S. Desai & Ors.                                       …..Petitioners
               : Versus :
State of Maharashtra, through the
Govt. Pleader & Ors.                                          ….Respondents


Mr. Atul Damle, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nikhil Jayakar i/b. Ms.
     Ranjana Parab, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Naushad Engineer, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amanjhot Anand, Ms.
     Bhavana Dubepatil i/b. M/s. Pravin Mehta and Mithi & Co., for
     Respondent Nos.5 and 6.
Mr. Aseem Naphade with Mr. Vishal Thaker, Mr. Mulanshu Vora, Mr.
     Adish Shah, Ms. Anjali Trivedi i/b. V. Thakers, for Respondent No.4.
Mr. A.C. Bhadang, AGP for State.




                                            CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
                                            DATED :    8 SEPTEMBER 2026.
P.C :


1)                   Petitioner challenges order dated 10 August 2026 passed by
the Divisional Joint Registrar, Mumbai Division, Mumbai dismissing
Revision Application No. 242/2026 and confirming the order dated 18
June 2026 passed by the Deputy Registrar. By his order dated 18 June
2026, the Deputy Registrar has disqualified the Petitioners who were

_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 1 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
Neeta Sawant                                              13-WP-11391-2026.docx


office bearers of Respondent No.4-society from being members of the
Committee and from being elected as members for a period of one year
under the provisions of 76(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies
Act, 1960.

2)             I have heard Mr. Damle, learned Senior Advocate appearing
for the Petitioners, Mr. Engineer, the learned             Senior Advocate
appearing for Respondent No.5 and Mr. Naphade, the learned counsel
appearing for Respondent No.4.

3)             It must be observed at the very outset that there is an
objection raised on behalf of the Petitioners about Mr. Naphade
representing Respondent No.4-society. However, in view of the fact that
the Petition is being decided on the basis of submissions canvassed on
behalf of the Petitioners and Respondent No. 55 it is not necessary to
deal with that objection.

4)             Respondent   No.4-society    has    decided    to   undertake
redevelopment of its building. A Resolution to that effect was passed in
the year 2013 by the Special General Body. M/s. Kolte Patil Developers
was appointed for the proposed redevelopment project in the year 2013
and a Memorandum of Understanding was executed on 26 August 2014.
In December 2021, the Society appointed a Project Management
Consultant (PMC). The Society thereafter terminated the appointment
of M/s. Kolte Patil Developers and it was decided to invite fresh tenders
for appointment of a new developer. Accordingly, in February 2024,
advertisement was issued in the newspapers and four bids were received
by the society. The PMC prepared a comparative chart in respect of the
bids. The society issued notice and agenda for a Special General Body
Meeting (SGBM) to be held on 21 April 2024 for presentation of the
three bids of the eligible developers. On 21 April 2024, SGBM was held
_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 2 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
Neeta Sawant                                              13-WP-11391-2026.docx


at which the presentations were made by two out of the 4 bidder-
developers. Another SGBM of the society was held on 30 June 2024, in
which no business could be transacted due to lack of quorum. On 7 July
2024 another SGBM was held for which again there was no requisite
quorum.

5)             On 6 October 2024, a requisition was sent by 29 members
for convening a Special General Body Meeting of the society for three
agenda items of (i) appointing and forming a Tower Committee, (ii)
appointing a new PMC and (iii) issuance of a fresh tender. The Managing
Committee adopted a resolution in meeting of 13 October 2024 to
proceed ahead with redevelopment with the two developers (Arkade and
Runwal) by issuing them notices rather than going for fresh bidding. The
Managing Committee accordingly issued notice for Special General Body
Meeting on 15 November 2024 and agenda item-2 was for appointment
of a developer. The Managing Committee however did take cognizance of
the requisition dated 6 October 2024 and decided to add all the three
items in a proposed meeting scheduled to be held on 1 December 2024.

6)             In the meeting held on 1 December 2024, a Resolution was
adopted by the majority for selecting M/s. Arkade Developers for
carrying out the redevelopment process. The three items in the
requisition made vide letter dated 6 October 2024 were put to vote and
72 members voted against the said three items.

7)             It appears that the members of the society had reservations
about M/s. Arkade Developers changing the offer from pure residential
to residential plus commercial. The members who were opposing the
developer's appointment desired publication of fresh tenders and
invitation of fresh offers for appointment of developer. Accordingly, one

_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 3 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
Neeta Sawant                                                  13-WP-11391-2026.docx


more requisition dated 31 December 2025 was made for convening
SGBM in respect of the seven agenda items.

8)             It appears that the Managing Committee took note of the
debate happening amongst the members and apparently called for revised
offer from the developer who this time offered 36% additional area for
residential plus commercial development or 24% additional area for pure
residential development. The Managing Committee therefore convened
SGBM on 11 January 2026 vide notice dated 5 January 2026 for conduct
of voting on following three options:




                Option            Offers Under 33(7)B without RG & Access

                  1      Approval of Residential + Commercial (36%)

                  2      Approval of Residential only (24%)

                  3      None Of The Above (NOTA) i.e. Rejection of Arkade
                         Developers




9)             Before issuing notice dated 5 January 2026, the Managing
Committee was already in receipt of requisition dated 31 December 2025.
Unlike its previous action of adding the agenda items in the requisition in
the meeting to be held on 11 January 2026, this time the Managing
Committee totally ignored the requisition dated 31 December 2025 and
decided to push ahead the SGBM on 11 January 2026 only on the agenda
for conduct of voting. Accordingly, the SGBM was held on 11 January
2026 and by majority of 64 votes against 55 votes, option no.1 for
residential plus commercial development was shown to have been passed
by majority.



_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 4 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
Neeta Sawant                                                                13-WP-11391-2026.docx


10)                  The notice dated 5 January 2026 and the minutes of the
SGBM dated 11 January 2026 clearly indicates no cognizance was taken
in respect of the agenda items suggested in the requisition dated 31
December 2025. It can therefore be safely assumed that the meeting in
terms of requisition dated 31 December 2025 is not conducted at all.

11)                  Under the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 76, the
Registrar can exercise powers of disqualification of members of the
Managing Committee for failure to conduct meeting after receipt of
requisition under Section 76(1). Section 76 of the MCS Act provides
thus:

               76. Special general body meeting.

               (1)A special general body meeting may be called at any time by the Chairman or
               by a majority of the committee and shall be called within one month-

                       (i)on a requisition in writing of one-fifth of the members of the society or
                       of members the number of which is specified in the bye-laws for the
                       purpose, whichever is lower, or

                       (ii)at the instance of the Registrar, or

                       (iii)in the case of a society, which is a member of a federal society, at the
                       instance of the committee of such federal society.

               (2)Where any officer or a member of the committee, whose duty it was to call
               such meeting without reasonable excuse, fails to call such meeting, the Registrar
               may by order declare such officer or member disqualified for being a member of
               the committee for such period [not exceeding five years] as he may specify in
               such order; and if the officer is a servant of the society, he may impose on him a
               penalty not exceeding [five thousand rupees]. Before making an order under this
               sub-section, the Registrar shall give, or cause to be given a reasonable
               opportunity to the person concerned of showing case against the action proposed
               to be taken in regard to him.



               (3)If a special general body meeting of a society is not called in accordance with
               the requisition referred to in sub-section (1) the Registrar or any person
               authorised by him in this behalf, shall have power to call such meeting, and that
               meeting shall be deemed to be a meeting duly called by the committee.



_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 5 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
Neeta Sawant                                                             13-WP-11391-2026.docx


               (4)The Registrar shall have power to order that the expenditure incurred in
               calling a meeting under sub-section (3) shall be paid out of the funds of the
               society or by such person or persons who, in the opinion of the Registrar, were
               responsible for the refusal or failure to convene the meeting.



12)                  In the present case, there is complete failure on the part of
the Managing Committee to convene any meeting in pursuance of
requisition dated 31 December 2025. The meeting held on 11 January
2026 cannot be treated as the one conducted in pursuance of requisition
dated 31 December 2025. I am not in agreement with the submission of
Mr. Damle that all the agendas suggested in requisition dated 31
December 2025 were subsumed in the agenda in the notice dated 5
January 2026. The agenda in the notice dated 5 January 2026 was only
for discussing either the two offers revised by M/s. Arkade Developers or
to reject his appointment altogether. The agenda for calling fresh tender
process etc. in the requisition dated 31 December 2025 was neither
included nor was taken up for discussion in the meeting held on 11
January 2026. In my view therefore, there is clear failure on the part of
the Petitioners to convene a meeting in terms of requisition dated 31
December 2025 thereby empowering the Registrar to order their
disqualification under Section 76(2) of the MCS Act.

13)                  Mr. Damle submits that sub-section (2) of Section 76 uses
the word 'may' and that therefore it is not mandatory that in every case
disqualification must be ordered. However, in the facts of the present
case I am of the view that the conduct of the Petitioners has been such
that their disqualification was clearly warranted. In respect of earlier
meeting held on 1 December 2024 also, the Petitioners violated Bye-laws
96, 97 and 98 which provide thus :

                 96. A Special General Body Meeting of the Society may be called at any time at
                 the instance of the Chairman or by the decision of the majority of the
_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 6 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
Neeta Sawant                                                            13-WP-11391-2026.docx


               Committee and shall be called within one month of the date of the receipt or
               JOINT REGISTRAcquisition, in writing signed by at least 1/5th of the
               Members of the Society from the Registering Authority or from the Housing
               Federation to which the Society is affiliated. The meeting so convened shall not
               transact any business, other than that mentioned in the Notice of the Meeting
               fixing date, time and place for a Special General Body Meeting requisitioned.

               97. The requisition for the special general body meeting of the Society, under
               the bye-low no. 95 shall be placed within 7 days of its receipt, before the
               Meeting of the Committee, by the Secretary of the Society, for fixing the date,
               time and place for the Special General Body Meeting of the Society.

               98. The committee shall decide the date, time and place of every general body
               meeting of the society and the business to be transacted thereat ; provided that
               the business to be transacted at the requisitioned special general body meeting
               shall be only that mentioned in the requisition. The notice convening the
               general body meeting shall be issued by the Secretary of the Society accordingly
               as provided in Bye-law No. 162. On his failure to issue the notice, the Chairman
               shall issue it.



14)                 Thus, under Bye-law 98, once requisition for Special
General Body Meeting is received, no other business can be included in
the notice or can be transacted in the SGBM than the one for which the
requisition is made. However, in the meeting dated 1 December 2024, the
Managing Committee merely added the three Agenda items of
requisition dated 6 October 2024 instead of conducting Special General
Body Meeting separately qua the requisitioned items. In respect of the
second requisition made on 31 December 2025, the Managing Committee
did not even include any of the seven Agenda items in the requisition in
the notice issued on 5 January 2026. In my view, therefore the
disqualification of the Petitioners in the facts and circumstances of the
present case was clearly warranted.

15)                 Considering the above position, I am not inclined to interfere
in the impugned orders passed by the Deputy Registrar as upheld by the
Divisional Joint Registrar. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits. It is
accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
                                PAGE NOS. 7 of 8
                              Tuesday, 8 September 2026
                      Neeta Sawant                                              13-WP-11391-2026.docx


                      16)            At this stage, it is pointed out that the Petitioners have not
                      handed over the charge despite rejection of the Revision on 10 August
                      2026. No interim order was passed in the present petition. In that view
                      of the matter, Petitioner shall forthwith handover charge to the other
                      Committee Members.

NEETA
SHAILESH
SAWANT
Digitally signed by
NEETA SHAILESH                                                      [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
SAWANT
Date: 2026.09.10
10:13:54 +0530




                      _____________________________________________________________________________
                                                      PAGE NOS. 8 of 8
                                                    Tuesday, 8 September 2026