1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 825 OF 2010. (Gulshan Kukkutpalan Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. and another -versus- State of Maharashtra and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JULY 02, 2010. Heard Shri M.V. Samarth, learned counsel for petitioners, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1, Shri A.Y. Kapgate,learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3, Shri P.R. Pudke, learned counsel for respondent no.4. Last time after hearing respective counsel, the petitioner was asked to show his bonafides. Today Shri Samarth, learned counsel states that total demand is of Rs. 5 lakhs and out of which Rs. 1 lakh is already paid. He further states that from the balance Rs. 1.5 lakhs would be deposited, and the Gram Panchayat may decide the representation made on 23.01.2009 by the petitioner. He states that the petitioner has also moved State Government complaining of the excessive tax, as its activity is only of Poultry Farm. Shri Kapgate, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Shri Pudke, learned counsel for respondent no.4 2 contend that the provisions of Section 124[6] are not applicable in the present matter. They further points out that the representation dated 23.01.2009 is also misconceived, because the Gram Panchayat has no powers to grant such relief, as Poultry Farm is neither an Industry nor a Cattle Shed. Learned A.G.P. supports the argument of respondent nos. 2 to 4. The petitioners representation is pending since 23.01.2009. The nature of activity and its effect qua the relevant provisions can be looked into by respondent no.4. It is not necessary for this court to observe anything on the merits of that representation. Petitioner has offered to pay amount of Rs. 1.5 lakhs to the Gram Panchayat. The said amount be deposited by the petitioner with the Gram Panchayat by 30.07.2010. If the amount is so deposited, Gram Panchayat shall consider the representation dated 23.01.2009 on its own merit and decide the same within a further period of four weeks thereafter i.e. by 31.08.2010. The petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the orders passed by the Gram Panchayat if he is not satisfied with the same. If the amount is not deposited, Gram Panchayat can proceed to recover the entire balance amount. Petitioner had already moved the State Government under Section 124[6] of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act and it is for the State Government to consider that representation on its own merit. It is made clear, that till the Gram Panchayat decides the representation, and if the amount is deposited coercive steps for recovery of balance amount shall not be taken against the petitioner. 3 With above directions and liberty to petitioner, Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.