Bombay High Court
Matsa Udyog Matsya Vyavasay ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 22 February, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
1 wp1021.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.1021 OF 2021
Matsa-Udyog Matya Vyavasay Sahakari
Sanstha Maryadit, Dapura,
Taluka Manora, District Washim
Through its Chairman/Secretary,
Arun Shankar Sonone,
Age 38 years, Occu- Fishing/Agri.,
R/o At Post Injauri, Taluka Manora,
District Washim. ...PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1) The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Secretary,
Animal Husbandry, Dairy and
Fisheries Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.
(Copy to be served on the Govt.
Pleader, High Court of Bombay,
Bench at Nagpur)
2) The Commissioner, Fisheries,
Taraporwala Matsalaya,
Charni Road, Mumbai.
3) The Assistant Registrar,
Co-operative Societies
(Animal Husbandry, Dairy and
Fisheries Department), Akola
3, Office of the District Dairy Development
Department, Murtizapur Road,
Near Government Dairy, Akola.
4) The Assistant Commissioner (Fisheries) (Ta.)
Headquarters Washim, Akola,
Office : Shri Bodwadi's Building,
Nityanand Nagar, Near Sant Tukaram Hospital,
Gorakshan Road, Akola.
5) The Regional Deputy Director,
Dairy, Amravati Division,
Amravati.
::: Uploaded on - 24/02/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 24/02/2021 21:22:24 :::
2 wp1021.21.odt
6) Proposed Navnath Matsya Vyavsay Sahakari
Sanstha, Dhamni (Khadi), Taluka Karanja
Lad, District Washim, Through its Chief
Promoter - Ashok Motiram Malte,
Age years, Occ: Fishing,
R/o At Post Dhamni (Khadi),
Taluka Karanja, District Washim. ...RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri M.R. Sonwane, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri K.L. Dharmadhikari, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 to 5.
Shri S.K. Tambde, Advocate for respondent No.6/caveator.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED :- 22nd FEBRUARY, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT
Though this writ petition is coming for the first time it
can be disposed of today itself. After hearing the learned counsel
for the petitioner Shri M.R. Sonwane, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 5 Shri K.L.
Dharmadhikari and learned counsel for the respondent no.6 Shri
S.K. Tambde, Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard
finally by consent of the parties.
(2) The respondent no.6 has filed an appeal before the
Commissioner Fisheries, which is registered as Appeal No.2 of
2020. The appeal was barred by limitation therefore the
application for condonation of delay was filed. The appeal was
filed against the present petitioner. There is no dispute before this
3 wp1021.21.odt
Court by any of the parties that though the appeal was barred by
limitation an application for condonation of delay was filed on
behalf of the respondent no.6. Notice on that application for
condonation of delay was not issued and without hearing the
learned counsel for the petitioner, on 11.11.2020 the respondent
no.2 condoned the delay and kept the appeal for hearing on
merits.
(3) Thereafter the parties have filed reply. On 05.02.2021,
the Commissioner allowed the appeal filed by the respondent
no.6. From the impugned orders dated 11.11.2020 and
05.02.2021, it is clear that oral hearing was not given to the
petitioner nor to the respondent no.6 by the respondent no.2,
though reply was filed. Reply is one thing and arguments is
another. In arguments counsel for the parties would have
elaborated the points raised in the reply therefore the hearing is
must.
(4) Since the oral hearing was not given to the counsel for
the petitioner as well as counsel for the respondent no.6, in my
view, it breaches the principles of natural justice. The justice can
be done by giving following orders:
4 wp1021.21.odt
(5) The writ petition is allowed. Both impugned orders
dated 11.11.2020 and 05.02.2021 are hereby quashed and set
aside.
(6) The respondent no.2- the Commissioner of Fisheries
shall give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as
respondent no.6 on application for condonation of delay. The
application for condonation of delay can be decided along with
appeal itself by giving opportunity of hearing.
(7) All the points raised in this writ petition are kept open.
(8) The petitioner as well as respondent no.6 is directed
appear before the respondent no.2 on 05.03.2021.
(9) The respondent no.2-Commissioner Fisheries shall
decide the appeal along with application for condonation of delay
as early as possible and within a period of two months from
05.03.2021.
Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to
costs.
JUDGE
Wagh
