Bombay High Court

AMOL CHANDRABHAN GOJEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided: 28 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The revocation order dated 31‑01‑2024 is ultra vires and must be set aside.

Summary

Amol Goje purchased Flat No.10 of the Satyawadi Sahakari Co‑op. Housing Society and, together with the former member Hirabai Shinde, applied to the Pune Collector for transfer of society membership. The Collector approved the transfer on 25‑02‑2014 subject to payment of a fee and a condition that any false or misleading information would lead to revocation. In 2021 complaints alleging fraudulent documents were made, and on 31‑01‑2024 the Collector unilaterally revoked the earlier order without a proper hearing. The petitioner challenged the revocation by filing a writ petition. The Court held that the Collector had no authority to review his own order absent a proven breach of the condition and that no evidence of false documents was adduced, rendering the revocation order ultra vires and unreasoned. Consequently, the revocation order was set aside and the writ petition was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the Pune Collector had the authority to review and revoke his own order dated 25‑02‑2014 granting membership transfer.
Whether the petitioner breached the condition that false or misleading information would lead to revocation of membership.
Whether the revocation order dated 31‑01‑2024 is valid in the absence of a proper hearing and substantive evidence.

Legislation cited

Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960

Subjects

co-operative housing society
membership transfer
revocation
collector's jurisdiction
fraud
writ petition
Maharashtra
social welfare department
due process

Judgment

WP- 11404-2024.doc

Rohit Ghuge

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ROHIT
Digitally signed
by ROHIT
RAMDAS
GHUGE
WRIT PETITION NO. 11404 OF 2024
RAMDAS Date:
GHUGE 2026.10.08
11:02:54
+0530

Amol Chandrabhan Goje,
Age: 56 years, Occ. Service,
R/at H-302, Lubaram Park,
Magarpatta City, Hadapsar,
Pune-411020. …Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Maharashtra,

2. The Divisional Commissioner,
Pune Region, Pune.

3. The Collector, Pune
Collector Office,
(Revenue Department)
Pune.

4. The Assistant Commissioner
Social Justice & Welfare Department
Pune.

5. The Joint District Registrar Class-2@
The Administrative Officer, Pune City, Pune
Finance Road, Photo Zico Press,
1st Floor, In front of B.J.Girls Hostel, Pune – 4.

6. The Deputy – Joint Registrar Class – 2,
Haveli No. 23
5 Finance Road, Government Photo Zico Press,
1st Floor, in front of B.J.Girls Hostel, Pune – 4.

1/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

7. The Satyawadi Sahakari Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd.
Through its Chairman, Secretary,
Plot No. 10, First Floor,
City Survey No. 15/1+2+3,
Plot No. A-2,CTS No. 1237,
Erandwana, Pune – 04.

8. Shekhar Maruti Bamane
Age: 55 years, Occ. Service,
R/at : CTS No. 36, Vanarai Colony,
Dhanakawadi, Pune 46.

9. Vinayak Rajaram Shinde,
Age: 49 years, Occ. Service,
R/at City Survey No. 36,
Vanarai Colony, Dhanakawadi,
Pune – 46.

10. Hirabai Rajaram Shinde,
Age: 80 years, Occ. Housewife,
Rajbhoj City Survey No. 201,
Plot No. 7, Madhuban Vidyadhan Co-op. Hsg. Society,
Opp. Jyoti Vihar, Dhankawdi,
Pune 411 043.

11. Shantaram Shinde
Age: 42 years, Occ. Service,
R/at City Survey No. 32/15,
Rajvilas Complex, Plot No. 27
Behind Bharthi Vidyapeeth,
Dhanakawdi Pune 411 043.
…Respondents
Mr. Rahul S. Kadam, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Kedar B. Dighe, Add.G.P., a/w Mr. M. M. Pable, AGP, for
Respondent- State

CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER 2026

2/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

JUDGMENT [Per Ashish S. Chavan J.]:

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the

consent of the parties and is taken up for final disposal. Learned

counsel appearing for the Respondents waive notice on behalf of

the respective Respondents.

2. By way of this Petition, the Petitioner who is aggrieved by

order dated 31.01.2024 passed by Respondent No. 3- Collector,

Pune revoking/cancelling the earlier approval of membership of the

Petitioner in the Respondent No. 7 Society, has approached this

Court invoking its Writ jurisdiction.

3. Respondent No. 7 is society registered under the Maharashtra

Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 formed for the housing needs of

persons belonging to the backward class. The original member of

Flat No. 10 of the Respondent No. 7 society was one Rajaram

Shinde. After his demise, his legal heirs were brought on record.

Thereafter, one Hirabai Rajaram Shinde became the member of

Flat No. 10. The Petitioner claims to be bona fide purchaser who

purchased the Flat No. 10 from the said Hirabai Shinde vide deed

of assignment somewhere in 2013.

3/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

4. On 16.05.2013, the Petitioner and Respondent No. 10

Hirabai Shinde jointly made an application to the Respondent No. 3

- Collector, Pune for transfer of membership in favour of the

Petitioner. Vide its Reply dated 12.12.2013, the office of

Respondent No. 3 sought some documents from Respondent No.

10 - Hirabai Shinde. On 03.02.2014, the Respondent No. 3

addressed a communication to the Petitioner in connection with his

aforesaid application intimating him that his request for transfer of

membership was accepted subject to payment of transfer fee of Rs.

89,600/-. In response to the aforesaid communication, the Petitioner

deposited the transfer fee on 05.02.2014. On 25.02.2014 the office

of Respondent No. 3 issued an order granting membership of Flat

No. 10 to the Petitioner on certain terms and conditions. The

condition that assumes significance in the light of the present

Petition is that in the event any information furnished by the

Petitioner in his affidavit is either misleading or incorrect, it would

lead to the revoking / recall of his membership.

5. The Petitioner contends that thereafter, certain complaints

were made by some individuals to the office of Respondent No. 3

4/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

alleging use of fraudulent documents by the Petitioner to obtain the

transfer of membership of the flat. On 17.09.2021 the Petitioner

was shocked to receive a notice from the office of Respondent No.3

informing him that the Social Welfare Department, Pune has given

an adverse report against the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 3 is

conducting a review into the transfer of membership in favour of

the Petitioner. The notice directed the Petitioner to remain present

in the office of the Respondent No. 3 on 05.10.2021 for a hearing

in that regard. It is further contended by the Petitioner that on

27.12.2023 one hearing took place before the Respondent No. 3

and on 31.01.2024, without looking into the grievance of the

Petitioner, the Respondent No. 3 revoked earlier order dated

25.02.2014 granting approval to the transfer of the membership in

favor of the Petitioner. It is this order which is assailed by the

Petitioner before this Court.

6. Heard, Mr. Kadam, for the Petitioner and Mr. Dighe,

Add.G.P., for Respondent- State

7. The learned Add.G.P., Mr. Dighe, has defended the impugned

order dated 31.01.2024. Inviting our attention to the order

5/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

impugned, he submits that some fraudulent documents were

tendered by the Petitioner to mislead the Respondent No. 3 and

secured an order dated 25.02.2014 inter alia transferring the

membership of Flat No. 10 in his favour. He would further contend

that the order dated 25.02.2014 was premised on several

conditions, one of which was that if the member has provided false

and misleading information to the Respondent No. 3-Collector, the

transfer of membership would stand automatically stand

cancelled/revoked. Thus, he would justify the impugned order

which reviews the earlier order dated 25.02.2014 contending that

the membership was revoked by Respondent No.3 being in breach

of the condition on which it was premised.

8. The issue that arises for consideration before us is whether

Respondent No. 3 – Collector, Pune had the authority to issue the

impugned order dated 31.01.2024 which amounted to a review of

his earlier order dated 25.02.2014 and whether the Petitioner was

in breach of any condition emanating from the order dated

25.02.2014. A perusal of the order dated 25.02.2014 reveals two

aspects. Firstly, that the transfer of membership of Flat No. 10 in

favour of the Petitioner was subject to payment of a transfer fee

6/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

which was duly paid by the Petitioner. There was no legal

impediment to the transfer of the flat in favour of the Petitioner as

such transfer was clearly covered by State GR No.

LCS0606/P.K.54/J-1 dated 25.05.2007. Secondly, it is evident that

the aforesaid order was premised on the condition that if the

Petitioner had furnished any false or misleading facts in his affidavit

in support of the application for transfer of membership, the

membership would stand revoked/cancelled.

Although there are other conditions enumerated in the said

order, learned Add.G.P., has submitted that the Petitioner is in

breach of the aforesaid condition since he has furnished false and

fabricated documents to secure transfer of the membership in his

favor. However, despite our queries as to which false or fabricated

documents were furnished by the Petitioner, learned Add.G.P., Mr.

Dighe could not provide us any satisfactory answer. A perusal of the

impugned order dated 31.01.2024 also reveals that the ground on

which the membership of the Petitioner is revoked is that prior to

transferring membership in his favor it was necessary to obtain an

approval from the Social Welfare Department, Pune and that the

State G.R. dated 25.05.2007 was not applicable to the society i.e.

Respondent No. 7 which was formed for the benefit of backward

7/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

class members.

One fact that emerges with clarity before us is that there is no

discussion about any forged documents / affidavit furnished by the

Petitioner as contended by the Learned Add.G.P.. The order of

25.02.2014 transferring membership of the flat to the Petitioner

was based on the State G.R. dated 25.05.2007 bearing No.

LCS0606/P.K.54/J-1, which provided for regularization for the

membership of flats upon payment of certain transfer fee. It is not

in dispute that the petitioner has paid such transfer fee and

Respondent No. 3 has vide his order dated 25.02.2014 transferred

membership in his favour. This order could be revisited/reviewed by

Respondent No. 3 only in the event of a breach of the condition on

which it was premised. The learned Add.G.P., has not pointed out

any breach of the condition enumerated in the order dated

25.02.2014. He has also not pointed out any provision of law

which would authorize the Respondent No. 3 - Collector to review

his own order. In such circumstances, in the wake of the aforesaid

discussion, we find that the impugned order dated 31.01.2024

deserves to be set aside, being unreasoned and without any

authority. Consequently the challenge to the order dated

31.01.2024 succeeds. The Writ Petition is allowed. Rule is made

8/9
WP- 11404-2024.doc

absolute.

We must clarify that the society i.e. Respondent No. 7, is at

liberty to take steps, if it so desires, in accordance with the due

process of law.

ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. BHARATI DANGRE, J.

9/9

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.