Mukunda Shantaram Tayade vs The District Water Conservation ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13169 Bom

                                            1                      943 n 952 wp. 10189.21 anr.odt


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
                        943 WRIT PETITION NO.10189 OF 2021

                    MUKUNDA SHANTARAM TAYADE
                             VERSUS
       THE DISTRICT WATER CONSERVATION OFFICER AND OTHERS
                                      ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Kishore C. Sant.
Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. Maheshkumar S. Sonwane.
AGP for Respondent/State: Ms R. P. Gour.
                                      ...
                                       AND
                        952 WRIT PETITION NO.10206 OF 2021

                    MUKUNDA SHANTARAM TAYADE
                             VERSUS
       THE DISTRICT WATER CONSERVATION OFFICER AND OTHERS
                                       ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Kishor C. Sant.
Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. Maheshkumar S. Sonwane.
AGP for Respondent/State: Ms R. P. Gour.
                                      ...

                                     CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                             R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

                                     DATE       :   15th September, 2021.

P.C.:

.                  Mr. Sonwane, learned counsel appears for respondent

Nos.1 to 3. The learned AGP appears for respondent No.4

2 Mr. Sant, learned counsel submits that the show cause

notice is issued to the petitioners as to why the petitioners should not

be blacklisted. The learned counsel submits that the show cause

notice is issued solely on the ground that the petitioners have not

2 943 n 952 wp. 10189.21 anr.odt

uploaded the scan copy of the DD pertaining to the security deposit.

The learned counsel submits that the same is not necessary. The said

issue is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment in the case of

M/s. R. R. Sancheti Vs. State of Maharashtra and others in Writ

Petition No.5244 of 2018 decided by the Nagpur Bench of this Court

on 6th September, 2018.

3 As the impugned notice is only a show cause notice and

the petitioners have opportunity to file reply to it, we are not inclined to

interference at this stage. Naturally the respondents shall consider the

reply filed by the petitioner and the judgment delivered by this Court

and the Government decision dated 26th November, 2018 before taking

the decision on the said show cause notice.

4 At the request of the learned counsel for petitioners, time

to file reply is extended by seven days.

5 Both the writ petitions are disposed of. All contentions of

the respective parties kept open. No costs.

[ R. N. LADDHA, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] nga