-: 1 :- wp-2793/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2793 OF 2011 Mr. T. B. Mansinghani Sunshine Punjab Hotel. ..Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. P. C. Kansara for the petitioner. Ms.P. S. Cardozo, AGP for the respondents-State. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : April 7, 2011. P. C. : 1. Rule. The learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service for the respondent - State. Considering the narrow controversy involved in the petition, the same is immediately taken up for final disposal. 2. By order dated 4th March 2011, respondent no.2 suspended the police licence in respect of the petitioner’s establishment for the period of 30 days. The said order was served on the petitioner on 7th March 2011. The petitioner was given 30 days’ time to approach the appellate authority under section 33 of the Bombay Police Act. The period of 30 days provided for filing appeal comes to an end on 6th April 2011. The petitioner has filed appeal on 24th March 2011 alongwith an application for stay, which is in time. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that neither the appeal nor srp -: 2 :- wp-2793/11 his stay application is being taken up for hearing by the appellate authority. As the appellate authority has not considered the application for stay on merits, now, the order of cancellation of licence, which is subject matter of challenge in the appeal may operate. The order specifically notes that in case appeal is not preferred within the period of 30 days, the order of cancellation of licence will be implemented. Thus, though the appeal is filed by the petitioner within the stipulated period of 30 days, only because the appellate authority could not find time to decide the application for stay or appeal, the order of cancellation of licence will become operative. This will defeat the very object of providing for an appeal against the order of cancellation of licence. Therefore, the appellate authority will have to be directed to decide the appeal within a time bound schedule and limited protection will have to be granted to the petitioner. 4. Ms. Cardozo, learned AGP submitted that the direction may be given to the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and a limited protection may be given to the petitioner till the disposal of such appeal. 5. In the light of these facts and circumstances, writ petition is disposed of by passing following order. -: O R D E R :- -: 3 :- wp-2793/11 (i) The appellate authority-Respondent no.4 is directed to hear and decide the petitioner’s appeal, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) During the pendency and till the final disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner, the effect, operation and implementation of the order dated 4th March 2011 passed by respondent no.3 Dy. Commissioner of Police in respect of the petitioner’s establishment shall remain stayed. (iii) In the event of passing of any order adverse to the petitioner, the same shall not be given effect for the period of two weeks from the date of communication thereof to the petitioner. (iv) All contentions of the parties in the pending appeal are kept open. (v) It is made clear that the appellate authority will decide the appeal without being influenced by the grant of a limited protection to the petitioner. (vi) Rule is partly made absolute in above terms. (vii) There will be no orders as to costs. (RANJIT MORE, J.)