901-wp9322-2021.doc AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9322 OF 2021 Baliram Nanu Mhaske & Ors. … Petitioners V/s. The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Thane City & Ors. … Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.13960 OF 2023 IN WRIT PETITION NO.9322 OF 2021 Baliram Nanu Mhaske, deceased through heirs & LRs & Ors. … Petitioners V/s. The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Thane City & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Ajit M. Savagave for the petitioners. Mr. Y.D. Patil, AGP for respondent Nos.1, 4, and 5- State. Mr. Sagar A. Joshi for respondent Nos.6 to 9. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 19, 2025 P.C.: 1. This writ petition arises from proceedings taken under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The facts are simple. An inquiry was first held under Section 83. On the basis of that inquiry, the authorities started action under Section 88. The petitioners challenge that action. 1 ATUL GANESH KULKARNI Digitally signed by ATUL GANESH KULKARNI Date: 2025.11.19 14:39:37 +0530 901-wp9322-2021.doc 2. The inquiry under Section 83 was completed. Relying on that material, the Authorized Officer started Section 88 proceedings on 9 April 2012. He issued notices as required under Rule 72. He heard the parties. He then fixed personal liability on the petitioners and others. The petitioners filed an appeal. The appeal failed. They filed a revision. That also failed. They have approached this Court because they believe the authorities acted without proper basis. 3. During the pendency of this petition, petitioner numbers 1 and 3 deposited one lakh fifty thousand rupees each. This amount covers the principal and part of the interest that the authorities claimed under Section 88. 4. I have gone through the report. The Authorized Officer framed two charges. He relied fully on the Section 83 report. When one examines that report, charge number 1 relates to a transaction that took place more than five years before the Section 83 inquiry. Section 88 does not permit action based on events beyond five years. The material placed before me does not show any lawful reason to ignore this time bar. Therefore, charge number 1 cannot be sustained. 5. Charge number 2 stands on a different footing. The record shows that petitioner number 1 retained an amount of 8,190.50 rupees. This finding rests on clear material. The record further shows that petitioner number 3 never received this amount. There is nothing credible to show that petitioner number 3 shared responsibility for that sum. When liability is fixed under Section 2 901-wp9322-2021.doc 88, there must be clear evidence that the concerned person has in fact caused the loss. The report does not provide that evidence against petitioner number 3. Therefore, the liability fixed on petitioner number 3 cannot stand. 6. Another error appears from the record. The Authorized Officer imposed costs on the petitioners and other persons by applying Section 83. Such costs can only be imposed under Section 85. Section 88 is limited to fixing personal financial liability for actual loss. It does not permit imposition of costs. The Authorized Officer mixed these provisions, which is not permissible. The part of the order that imposes costs on petitioner numbers 1 and 3 must be quashed. 7. In view of these findings, the following order is passed. a. The writ petition is partly allowed. The liability imposed on petitioner No. 3 is quashed. b. Petitioner No. 1 shall pay 8,190.50 rupees with interest at twelve percent. The interest comes to 12,777.18 rupees. Petitioner number 1 shall pay a total of 20,967.68 rupees. c. From the amount of 1,50,000 rupees already deposited by petitioner No. 1, the society shall retain only 20,967.68 rupees. The society shall refund the balance within four weeks. The society shall also refund the full amount of 1,50,000 rupees deposited by petitioner No. 3, within the same period. 3 901-wp9322-2021.doc 8. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. No costs. 9. All pending interim applications stands disposed of accordingly. (AMIT BORKAR, J.) 4