IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 6133 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 6133 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 6133 OF 2008 Shri Sayad Kadir Amir Jan. ... Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. ... Respondents. Mr.Bobby Malhotra-Paul for the petitioner. R.M.Patne, AGP for the respondents. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 22nd October 2008. DATED: 22nd October 2008. DATED: 22nd October 2008. JUDGMENT : JUDGMENT : JUDGMENT : -------- -------- -------- . Heard. . Perused petition. 2. Rule, returnable forthwith. Petition is taken up for hearing by consent of parties. 3. This petition is directed against the order dated 17th July, 2008 passed by the Minister for Home, State of Maharashtra confirming the order dated 3rd October, 2006 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai cancelling the licence issued to the eating house run by petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner during the course of hearing brought to my notice various judgments/orders passed by this Court to contend that the impugned order is contrary to the law laid down by this Court in series of cases. [see 1996 (3) BCR 714; judgment dated. 10th April, 1996 passed in W.P.No.2291/1996; order dated 15th January, 1999 passed in W.P.No.102/1999; order dated 20th September, 2001 passed in W.P.No.3976/2001 and recent order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 12th October, 2006 passed in W.P.No.5675/2006.] 5. Having found substance in the above submission and having noticed that in spite of aforesaid various judgments of this Court, the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai proceeded to pass order cancelling the licence issued to the eating house run by the petitioner knowing fully well that the cases referred to in the show-cause-notice against the petitioner are still pending for adjudication. 6. Having noticed that the impugned order is passed in breach of law laid down by this Court, show cause notice was issued to the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai calling upon him to show cause as to why action should not be taken against him under the Contempt Court Act for not following the law laid down - 3 - by this Court from time to time, when it was obligatory on his part to follow the same in its true letter and spirit. 7. On being served with the show cause notice, the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai appeared and tendered an apology and withdrew the order impugned in this petition. He has assured this Court that hence forth no such mistake would be committed by him. However, while tendering apology, he brought to my notice one difficulty leading to non-communication of the orders of this Court laying down any law or principle. He, thus, submits that this Court should work out some mechanism so as to communicate all the concerned authorities the judgments/orders passed by this Court laying down law or principle. 8. This Court, finding substance in the above submission, issued notice to the Director of Public Prosecution to work out modalities as to how the orders passed by this Court could be communicated to all the authorities concerned to make them aware about the law laid down by this Court so as to prevent unnecessary litigations chocking the corridors of the courts. - 4 - 9. Heard learned A.G.P. appearing for the State. Considering the various suggestions made, the importance of necessity to bring to the notice of the concerned authorities of the Government, the judgments and/or orders passed by this Court from time to time cannot be ignored. As such all the Public Prosecutors and the Government Pleaders and/or Additional/Assistant Government Pleaders are directed to communicate the judgments/orders laying down law or principle to the Government authorities may be through the office of the Government Pleader with one copy to the Secretary of the department, who in turn can circulate the copies of the judgments/orders to the various relevant departments and/or the concerned authorities. In the event two or more departments of the State are concerned, the Secretary, to whom such communication is made by the Government Pleader/ Public Prosecutor, should send the copy of the said judgment/order to the other concerned department. If the judgment is applicable to all the departments of the State, then it should be brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra by the office of the Government Pleader/ Public Prosecutor, who, in turn, should ensure that the said judgment/ - 5 - order is circulated to all the concerned authorities. 10. If the modalities indicated hereinabove are followed in its true letter and spirit, then one can reasonably expect the implementation of law and/or principle laid down by this Court so as to curtail unnecessary litigations in the courts. 11. The Registrar General is directed to forward the copy of this judgment to the Government Pleaders, Original as well as Appellate Sides, Public Prosecutor and also to the Secretary, Law and Judiciary with complementary copy to the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya for information and action. 12. In the result, petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute in terms of this order with no order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, (V.C.DAGA, (V.C.DAGA, J.) J.) J.)