Bombay High Court
LATESH H. GADA AND ANRversusTHE DEPUTY REGISTRAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The disqualification was erroneous because no audit could be conducted during the period of administration and the complaint was not signed by Respondent No. 4, so the orders under the MCS Act must be set aside.
Summary
The petitioners, Latesh H. Gada and an associate, were disqualified as members and managing committee members of a cooperative society for five years by the Deputy Registrar under the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, on the ground that they failed to place the 2023‑24 audit report and audit‑rectification report before the AGM. The court noted that an administrator had been appointed to the society from 20 January 2024 to 22 October 2024, during which no audit could be conducted, making the petitioners’ alleged default untenable. An additional affidavit showed that Respondent No. 4 never signed the complaint that formed the basis of the disqualification. The judge held that the Deputy Registrar’s and Divisional Joint Registrar’s orders were erroneous and set them aside, thereby removing the disqualification. No order as to costs was made and the writ petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the disqualification of the petitioners under the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act is valid when no audit could be performed due to an administrator’s appointment.
- Whether the complaint signed by Respondent No. 4 is a necessary prerequisite for the disqualification order.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- disqualification
- cooperative society
- audit report
- annual general meeting
- Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act
- election rules
- writ petition
- administrative appointment
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:35160
Vaishnavi 34-p1-WP-6146-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6146 OF 2026
Latesh H. Gada and Anr. ...Petitioners
V/s.
The Deputy Registrar Co-Operative
Societies and Ors. ...Respondents
________________
Mr. Amrut Joshi a/w Ms. Miloni Gada, Ms. Manisha Prajapati and Ms.
Surabhi Aror i/b Miloni Gada, for Petitioners.
Mr. Krishnanand Shanbhag, for Respondent No. 3.
Mr. A. A. Alaspurkar, AGP for Respondent-State.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 18 AUGUST 2026
P.C.:
1) The Petition challenges order dated 9 April 2026 passed by the
Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai Division,
Mumbai, partly allowing Revision Application No. 21 of 2026 and
modifying the order of the Deputy Registrar dated 6 January 2026. The
Deputy Registrar had disqualified the Petitioners from being the
members and from being elected as managing committee members for
period of five years. While granting partial solace to the Petitioners, the
Page No.1 of 3
18 August 2026
Vaishnavi 34-p1-WP-6146-2026
Divisional Joint Registrar has reduced the period of disqualification from
five years to one year.
2) I have heard Mr. Joshi, the learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioners, Mr. Shanbhag, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent
No. 3 and Mr. Alaspurkar, the learned AGP appearing for Respondent
Nos. 1, 5. I have considered the submission canvased by them. I have also
gone through the findings recorded by the Deputy Registrar and by the
Divisional Joint Registrar in their respective orders.
3) It is seen that the Deputy Registrar and the Divisional Joint
Registrar have ordered disqualification of the Petitioners on a solitary
ground that the Petitioners failed to place before the Annual General
Body Meeting held on 29 September 2025 the audit report as well as
audit rectification report in respect of the previous year 2023-2024. Both
the authorities, however, have totally ignored the position that an
administrator was appointed on the Society, who functioned from 20
January 2024 till the charge was handed over on 22 October 2024.
Therefore, the Petitioners cannot be held responsible if the audit is not
conducted in respect of the previous year 2023-2024. If there is no audit,
there was no question of placing the audit report before the AGM. Since
there is no audit report, there cannot be any audit rectification report.
Without appreciating this position, the Deputy Registrar has erroneously
directed the disqualification of the Petitioners and the Divisional Joint
Registrar has erroneously accepted the disqualification. The impugned
orders are thus clearly erroneous.
Page No.2 of 3
18 August 2026
Vaishnavi 34-p1-WP-6146-2026
4) Additionally, Mr. Joshi has tendered an additional affidavit in
which Respondent No. 4 has confirmed that he had never signed the
complaint seeking disqualification of the Petitioners. This is an
additional factor which can be taken into consideration, since the Deputy
Registrar has ordered disqualification considering the position as if
Respondent No. 4 had also a complaint against the Petitioners.
5) Considering the above position, I am of the view that the
impugned orders passed by the Deputy Registrar and Divisional Joint
Registrar are erroneous and liable to be set aside.
6) Petition accordingly succeeds. The order dated 9 April 2026
passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar and order dated 6 January 2026
passed by the Deputy Registrar are set aside. Consequently, orders dated
24 April 2026 passed by the Deputy Registrar under Section 77A of the
MCS Act and under Rule 76B of the Election to a Committee Rules, 2014
are also set aside.
7) The Writ Petition is allowed in above terms. There shall be no
order as to costs.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Signed by: VAISHNAVI MAHADEV
Page No.3 of 3
SHEJAL 18 August 2026
Designation: PA to Honorable Judge
Date: 27/08/2026 16:40:05
Checking your session…