ANIL RANGNATHRAO PURI vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — WP/5614/2016

Case under Act Not Known. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 04th May 2026.

CNR: HCBM030206242016

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

08th June 2016

Filing Number

WP/16790/2016

Filing Date

12-05-2016

Registration No

WP/5614/2016

Registration Date

24-05-2016

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

04th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Acts & Sections

Act Not Known

Petitioner(s)

ANIL RANGNATHRAO PURI

Adv. Dighe Praveen S

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Adv. GP FOR R/ 1 TO 5,BHAVAR N.R. FOR R/ 7,R/ 6,8,9 SERVED,BHAVAR NITIN R.,SHINDE MAHESH P 1123

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

22-07-2016

AWAIT NOTICES CIVIL SIDE MATTERS

08-06-2016

URGENT CIRCULATION -CIVIL

12-03-2020

DUE ADMISSION -CIVIL

04-05-2026

DUE ADMISSION CIVIL

27-04-2026

Orders

04-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Case Summary: WP 5614/2016 The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) allowed Anil Rangnathrao Puri's writ petition, quashing the District Deputy Registrar's order directing an enquiry under Section 83 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner, serving as Assistant Registrar and Liquidator of a co-operative bank, had paid professional fees to panel advocates for legal proceedings. The court found no case for enquiry, holding that payment of fees to panel advocates on case-by-case basis constituted legitimate professional expenses within the Liquidator's statutory powers, with no evidence of misappropriation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 5614/2016 The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) allowed Anil Rangnathrao Puri's writ petition, quashing the District Deputy Registrar's order directing an enquiry under Section 83 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner, serving as Assistant Registrar and Liquidator of a co-operative bank, had paid professional fees to panel advocates for legal proceedings. The court found no case for enquiry, holding that payment of fees to panel advocates on case-by-case basis constituted legitimate professional expenses within the Liquidator's statutory powers, with no evidence of misappropriation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case