1. Heard Mr. Patel, learned Advocate for the petitioner.
2. It emerges from the record that the competent authority passed order under Section 107 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act and order of winding up has been passed against the petitioner society. Appeal against the said order has been rejected.
3. It appears that against the order passed by the Appellate Authority i.e. order dated 7.1.2011 in Appeal No.16 of 2011, present petitioner has already preferred revision application before the higher - Revisional Authority
4. It is not in dispute that the said revision application is still pending.
5. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner herein has taken out application seeking interim relief before the Revisional Authority against the order passed by the Appellate Authority.
6. The petitioner herein has not claimed that the said interim relief application has been heard on merits and has been rejected. Instead of coming out with clear and complete facts the petitioner has merely stated that the petitioner does not have any order passed by the Revisional Authority. The petitioner has not come forward with a case that the interim relief application is rejected and order rejecting the request for interim relief against the Appellate Authority's order has been passed.
7. Thus, when the revision application is pending and even his application for interim relief is pending for consideration, the petitioner cannot be allowed to avail writ remedy. The petitioner is trying to prosecute two remedies simultaneously. Remedy of prerogative writ cannot be abused for such purpose. The petition does not deserve to be entertained during pendency of revision application and while the application for interim relief is pending. Therefore petition is summarily rejected.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) jani Top