Bombay High Court
Gorej And Boyce Manufacturing Private ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal ... on 8 May, 2025
Author: A.S. Chandurkar
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
SNEHA
2025:BHC-AS:21231-DB
ABHAY
DIXIT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
by SNEHA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ABHAY DIXIT
Date: 2025.05.08
20:58:15 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO.6296 OF 2025
Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing ]
Company Private Limited, Mumbai ] .. Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra, ]
Through Revenue and Forest Department ]
2. Collector, Raigad District, ]
Tehsil - Alibag, Dist. - Raigad ]
3. Tahsildar, ]
Khalapur, Dist. Raigad ] .. Respondents
Dr. Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh,
Advocate, i/by Bachubhai Munim, for the Petitioner.
Mr. N.C. Walimbe, Additional Government Pleader with Mrs. Reena A.
Salunkhe, Assistant Government Pleader for the Respondents.
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ
DATE : 8TH MAY 2025.
ORAL JUDGMENT : { Per A.S. Chandurkar, J. }
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned counsel for
the parties.
2. The challenge raised in this writ petition is to a show cause notice
dated 24th January 2025 issued by the Tahsildar purportedly in exercise of
powers conferred by Section 48(7) and (8) of the Maharashtra Land
Revenue Code, 1966.
902-WP-6296-2025.doc
Dixit
3. It is urged by the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner that the
show cause notice suffers from jurisdictional defect in view of the fact that
the same has been issued in a manner contrary to the law laid down by
the Supreme Court in Promoters and Builders Association of Pune Vs.
State of Maharashtra and Ors., (2015) 12 SCC 736 and the judgment of
this Court in IKEA India Private Limited and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra,
through Revenue and Forest Department and Ors., 2024 SCC OnLine Bom
1029. To substantiate this aspect, the petitioner had filed an application
dated 4th February 2025 before the Tahsildar seeking dropping of the show
cause notice. It is then submitted that despite aforesaid, the Tahsildar after
issuance of the show cause notice has sought to collect material evidence
in the form of taking steps by utilizing an "ETS Machine". A grievance is
also raised as regard the clarity of the ETS Report that has been provided.
It is thus submitted that an untenable show cause notice is being
adjudicated by the Tahsildar in a manner contrary to law.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader submits that the
proceedings pursuant to the show cause notice are to be heard on 9 th May
2025. Since a request for grant of personal hearing has been made by the
petitioner, the same could be considered by the Tahsildar. All objections
could be raised at that stage.
902-WP-6296-2025.doc
Dixit
5. At the outset, we may state that challenge raised in this writ petition
is to a show cause notice. Since it is the contention of the petitioner that
the same has been issued in a manner contrary to the law laid down by
the Supreme Court in Promoters and Builders Association of Pune (supra) ,
an application dated 4th February 2025 seeking dropping of the
proceedings has been moved. This application is yet to be adjudicated. In
our view, the interest of justice would be met by directing the Tahsildar to
first consider the application dated 4th February 2025 moved by the
petitioner for dropping the show cause notice. This can be done by
granting personal hearing, as prayed for. While considering the said
application, it is open for the Tahsildar to take into consideration all
relevant aspects including the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to
here-in-above. If however the Tahsildar finds the proceedings to be
maintainable, he shall proceed to adjudicate the show cause notice in
accordance with law after a period of four weeks from his decision on the
aspect of maintainability.
6. By keeping all contentions of the parties on merits open and with
aforesaid directions, the Rule is disposed of with no order as to costs.
[ DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]
902-WP-6296-2025.doc
Dixit
