Bombay High Court

MADHAV SHAMRAO HODAGIRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The order passed by the Registrar General of Money Lenders & Special Registrar of Co-operative Societies is quashed and set aside for being delayed beyond the eight‑week period prescribed for a speaking order.

Summary

The petitioner challenged an order dated 29 May 2023 issued by the Registrar General of Money Lenders & Special Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra, arguing that it was passed more than eight weeks after the matter was reserved for decision on 7 December 2022, contrary to the requirement of a "speaking order" within four to eight weeks as laid down in Smt. Savitri Chandrakesh Pal v. State of Maharashtra. The Court examined the timeline, found a delay of over eight weeks, and, without addressing the merits, quashed the order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision with a fresh hearing. The Court directed the parties to appear before the Registrar on 8 April 2026 and instructed a decision within six months. No substantive findings on the underlying dispute were made.

Issues considered

Whether the delay of more than eight weeks in passing the final order violates the principle of a speaking order as mandated in Smt. Savitri Chandrakesh Pal v. State of Maharashtra.
Whether the order passed by the Registrar should be quashed and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication.

Subjects

writ petition
speaking order
delay in adjudication
quashing order
remand
administrative law
procedural fairness

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:11729



                                                                    19 WP No.9641.2023
                                                -1-

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                WRIT PETITION NO. 9641 OF 2023

                                 MADHAV SHAMRAO HODAGIR
                                            VERSUS
                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
                                            OTHERS
                                                ...
              Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Vaibhav B. Kulkarni h/f Mr. A. S.
              Usmanpurkar
              AGP for Respondents-State : Ms. D. S. Jape
              Advocate for Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Shriram V. Deshmukh
                                                ...

                                CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                    Date : 4th March, 2026
              PER COURT :-


              1.          Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

              2.          The petitioner is assailing the order dated 29 th May 2023

              passed by respondent No. 2 - Registrar General of Money Lenders &

              Special Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra State, Pune in

              Revision Application No. 40/2022, whereby the revision filed by

              respondent no.7 came to be allowed.

              3.          The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the

              present case, respondent No.2 heard the matter finally on 7 th December,

              2022 and the matter was reserved for order. The final order was passed

              on 29th May 2023 i.e. after a delay of more than 8 weeks as mandated
                                                                     19 WP No.9641.2023
                                            -2-

by the judgment in the case of Smt. Savitri Chandrakesh Pal Vs. State of

Maharashtra and Ors. reported in 2009(4) ALL MR 194.


4.              He brought my attention to the paragraph no. 17 sub-

paragraph no. 14 of the Smt. Savitri (supra) which reads as under:-

     “17.     ……
            (14) A speaking order shall be passed by the authority hearing
                 the matter as early as possible after the hearing is concluded
                 and, as far as possible, within a period of four to eight weeks
                 from the conclusion of the hearing, on the basis of the
                 record before it as well as the submissions made at the
                 hearing. The order must contain reasons in support of the
                 order.”

5.              Upon perusal of the record, the Page No. 171 reveals that

the matter was finally heard on 7 th December, 2022 and Page No.178

reveals that the same was issued on 29th May 2023. Therefore, without

going into the merits of the matter, by adopting the same view taken in

Smt. Savitri (supra), I am inclined to quash and set aside the order

passed by respondent No.2 and remand the matter for fresh decision, on

the ground that respondent No.2 was required to pass the final order

within 8 weeks after the matter was reserved for order.

6.              In view thereof, the writ petition is partly allowed. The

order passed by respondent no.2-Registrar General of Money Lenders &

Special Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Maharashtra State, Pune in

Revision Application No.40/2022 is quashed and set aside. The matter

is remanded to respondent No.2 for fresh decision thereon.
                                                        19 WP No.9641.2023
                                    -3-

7.            It is made clear that this Court has not recorded any finding

on the merits of the matter. Respondent No.2 shall decide the matter

afresh by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

8.            The parties shall appear before respondent No.2 on 8th

April, 2026. Respondent No.2 is directed to decide the matter within a

period of six months from the date of appearance of the parties.




                                          (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)
Omkar Joshi

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…