M/S Taj Traders A Propietorship ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr The ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 597 Bom

    WP 194/16                                       1                          Judgment


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,




                                                                                   
                   NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                          WRIT PETITION No. 194/2016




                                                           
    M/s Taj Traders,
    a proprietorship concern,
    through its Proprietor Shri Akil Khan
    S/o Farid Khan Pathan,
    A/a 55 - Years, Occupation - Business,




                                                          
    R/o - Opposite Jesus Convent, 
    J.N. Patel College road, Bhandara.                                     PETITIONER

                                     .....VERSUS.....
    1.            The State of Maharashtra,




                                             
                  through the Secretary,
                  Revenue & Forest Department,
                              
                  Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.
    2.            The District Collector, Bhandara,
                  Through the Mining Officer, Bhandara.                    RESPONDENTS
                             
                      Shri Piyush Shukla, counsel for the petitioner.
          Shri Nikhil Joshi, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

                                      CORAM   :SMT.VASANTI A.NAIK AND
                                               V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.        

DATE : 14 TH MARCH , 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard

finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel

for the parties.

2. The only prayer made by the petitioner in the instant petition

is for a direction to the State of Maharashtra to decide the appeal filed by

the petitioner bearing Revenue Case No.Gaukhani 50/0615/San.Kra.

1067/Kha, in accordance with law within a time frame.

WP 194/16 2 Judgment

3. According to the petitioner, though the petitioner had filed

the appeal on 03.05.2014, the appeal is not decided by the State

Government, till date. It is, however, fairly stated that the hearing in the

said appeal was conducted after the writ petition was filed and a direction

may be issued to the respondent no.1-State to decide the appeal at the

earliest.

4. Shri Joshi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader

appearing on behalf of the respondents, states that the respondent no.1

would decide the appeal as early as possible, if not decided as yet.

5. In view of the statements recorded hereinabove, the writ

petition is allowed. The respondent no.1-State is directed to decide the

appeal filed by the petitioner as early as possible and positively within a

period of six weeks.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as

to costs.

                  JUDGE                                         JUDGE

    APTE