SANJAY B. SALVI vs THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR Advocate - P V SHEKHAWAT — RPW/69/2026

Case under Mah. Co-op. Soc. Act Section 227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010220402026

Filing Number

RPW/12845/2026

Filing Date

28-Apr-2026

Registration No

RPW/69/2026

Registration Date

30-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Borkar

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Borkar

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

Cooperative Socities ( 103 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Mah. Co-op. Soc. Act Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANJAY B. SALVI

    Adv. AMIT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR Advocate - P V SHEKHAWAT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit BorkarView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed Sanjay B. Salvi's review petition challenging the appointment of an Administrator in a cooperative society matter. The court held that under Section 77A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the appointed officer's authority is limited to conducting elections in accordance with rules and managing day-to-day expenses, without discretion for policy decisions or major expenditures—thereby addressing petitioner's concerns about impartiality and misappropriation allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Borkar

  4. 28-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. RPW/69/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed Sanjay B. Salvi's review petition challenging the appointment of an Administrator in a cooperative society matter. The court held that under Section 77A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the appointed officer's authority is limited to conducting elections in accordance with rules and managing day-to-day expenses, without discretion for policy decisions or major expenditures—thereby addressing petitioner's concerns about impartiality and misappropriation allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case