Judgment : 1. Rule, with the consent of the parties, made returnable forthwith and heard. 2. The above petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 16/11/2010 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Amravati, by which order the Appeal filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the Assistant Registrar dated 13/8/2010 superseding the Society by having recourse to Section 78 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies’ Act, 1960 came to be dismissed. 3. The proceedings under Section 78 of the said Act were commenced on the complaint of the respondent no.4 i.e. Narayan Mukundrao Deshmukh, who is the heir of the original member of the Society i.e. Smt.Vastalabai Deshmukh that in spite of direction being issued by the Registrar from time to time the respondent no.4 has not been made a member of the Society as being the heir of the said original member i.e. Smt.Vastalabai Deshmukh. The authorities below, in view of the noncompliance of the direction issued by the Registrar from time to time, which included the Divisional Joint Registrar, thought it fit to exercise the powers under Section 78 of the said Act and to supersede the Managing Committee of the said Society. 4. The above petition has been heard from time to time. On the last occasion, when the petition had appeared for admission, the learned counsel for the petitioner had sought time to take instructions as what was remained to be complied by the respondent no.4 as regards the grant of membership to him. Today, when the matter is called out, the learned counsel Shri Ravi Pande appearing for the petitioners, states that in respect of the plot in question, which was allotted to original member Smt.Vastalabai Deshmukh an amount of Rs.4,00,000/is due on account of the loan that was taken by the Society from the Maharashtra State Housing Finance Cooperative Ltd. For development of the plots in question which included the plot allotted to Smt.Vastalabai Deshmukh. 5. Upon this, the learned counsel Shri Anil Mardikar appearing for the respondent no.4, drew my attention to the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply, particularly in paragraph no.2, filed by the respondent no.4. 5. Upon this, the learned counsel Shri Anil Mardikar appearing for the respondent no.4, drew my attention to the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply, particularly in paragraph no.2, filed by the respondent no.4. It is stated in so far as dues of the Housing Finance Corporation are concerned, the same is a subject matter of Dispute No.394 of 1989 filed by the Maharashtra State Housing Finance Cooperative Society Ltd., which is presently pending before the Cooperative Court and the respondent no.4 is a party-respondent to the said Dispute. 6. The learned counsel Shri Mardikar on instructions of respondent no.4 states that his client would abide by the decision that would ultimately be rendered in the said Dispute and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to claim the amount which is sought on account of the amount to be paid to the Maharashtra State Housing Finance Cooperative Society Ltd. The learned counsel for the petitioner in turn states that the Society would have no objection if the respondent no.4 abides by the decision that would be rendered in the said Dispute No.394 of 1989. In my view, therefore, above petition can be disposed of by issuing the following directions. (i) The statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent no.4 to the effect that the respondent no.4 would abide by the decision rendered in Dispute No.394 of 1989 is accepted. The petitioner resultantly would be absolved of making any payment to the Maharashtra State Housing Finance Cooperative Ltd. in respect of the plot in question which was allotted to the original member Smt.Vastalabai Deshmukh. (ii) The petitioner would confer the membership rights within six weeks from date to the respondent no.4 as now nothing else is found due and payable from the respondent no.4. In the light of the above, the impugned order dated 16/11/2010 and the original order passed by the Assistant Registrar dated 13/8/2010 under Section 78 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 are quashed and set aside. Rule is accordingly made absolute in the aforesaid terms with parties to bear their respective costs.