1 wp9740.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9740 OF 2010 Jagdish S/o Purushottam Amrutkar ..PETITIONER -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra and others. ..RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. C.R. Deshpande, advocate for petitioner Mrs. V.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. D.S. Bagul, Advocate for respondent no.3. Mr. V.S. Bodakh holding for Mr. C.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent no.4. Mr. R.K. Ashtekar, advocate for respondent no.5. ..... CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 18th February, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard Advocates Mr. Deshpande for petitioner, Mr. Bagul for respondent no.3-Society, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2, Mr. V.S. Badakh for respondent no.4 and Mr. Astekar for respondent no.5. 2. Parties were heard Yesterday and matter was adjourned today to enable the respondent nos.1 to 3 to point out this Court reasons if any recorded by respondent no.2 while issuing revenue recovery certificate. 3. Today during hearing, it has become clear that no reasons are expressly recorded in the judgment by the respondent no.2. 2 wp9740.10 4. It needs to be noted that according to present petitioner, he is neither borrower nor guarantor. The effort of Advocate Mr. Deshpande for petitioner is to demonstrate that the petitioner is not legal representative of deceased borrower. Advocate Mr. Bagul for respondent no.3 has contended that deceased was mother of present petitioner and all her legal heirs are duty bound to pay the bank loan. The question need not be gone into by this Court at this stage. 5. As the R.R.C. is found issued without recording any reasons same is quashed and set aside by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in judgment reported at " 2010(6) All MR 550" ( Sundeep Ploymers Pvt. Ltd., & ors V/s State of Maharashtra & others). Hence, the impugned revenue recovery certificate dated 30.06.2010 is accordingly quashed and set aside. The proceedings in Application no. 1048 of 2009 instituted by respondent no.3 are restored back to the file of respondent no.2. The parties before this Court are directed to appear before the respondent no.3 on 21st March, 2011. The respondent no.2 shall attempt to decide the application before it as early as possible and in any case by 30th June, 2011. The Petition is thus partly allowed. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) gas/wp9740.10