Bombay High Court
Nabakumar Jogendernath Bose vs Commissioner Of State Excise, ... on 22 June, 2016
Bench: Z.A. Haq
1 wp322.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.322/2016
Nabakumar Jogendernath Bose,
aged about 51 Yrs., Occu. Business,
R/o 64, Vasant Nagar,
Ranapratap Chowk, Nagpur. ..Petitioner.
..VS..
1. Commissioner of State Excise,
Mumbai.
2. Collector, State Excise,
Nagpur.
3. Rajendranath Manindranath Bose,
age 43 Yrs., Occu. Business,
R/o 285, Dharampeth Extension,
Nagpur.
3-A. Miss Sagorika Gopalkrishna Bose,
aged about 49 Yrs., Occu. Nil,
R/o C/o Shri Nitin Kumar Bose,
"Ranu Kuteer", B-2, Vinayaka
Vihar, Post RSU, Raipur
(Chhatisgarh) 492 010. ..Respondents.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shri S.S. Voditel, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri K.R. Lule, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Shri A.S. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri N.A. Padhye, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Ms. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for respondent No.3-A.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATED : 22.6.2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1174/2016.
Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, the petitioner is directed
to implead the applicant intervenor as the respondent No.3-A in the petition. The
civil application is allowed.
2 wp322.16
1. Heard Shri S.S. Voditel, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri K.R. Lule, A.G.P.
for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Shri A.S. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri N.A.
Padhye, Advocate for respondent No.3 and Ms. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for respondent
No.3-A.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of
State Excise on 3rd March, 2015 upholding the order passed by the learned Collector
and disposing the appeal with directions that the business as per the CL-III license in
dispute shall be closed down till the dispute between the contesting parties is
resolved.
4. In paragraph No.12 of the petition, it is stated that the petitioner has filed
revision application under Section 138 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act and it is
pending before the State Government. In view of the above, it would not be
appropriate to entertain and decide the present petition.
5. Considering the nature of controversy, the following order is passed:
(i) The State Government shall dispose the revision application filed by the
petitioner against the order passed by the Commissioner of State Excise on 3 rd March,
2015, till 29th July, 2016.
(ii) The parties undertake to appear before the State Government on 8 th July,
3 wp322.16
2016.
(iii) The parties shall submit their written notes of arguments on 8 th July,
2016.
(iv) The Authority deciding the revision application shall grant hearing to the
parties.
(v) With the above directions, the petition is disposed.
(vi) In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.
ig JUDGE
Tambaskar.
