1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CA/14236/2010 IN WP/5301/2008 BHUSAWAL MUNICIPAL SHOPKEERS' ASSOCATION VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Shri D.K.Kulkarni, Advocate for applicant, Shri V.B.Ghatge,AGP for respondents 1 and 2 and Shri G.V.Wani, Advocate for respondent No.3 ... CORAM : S.B.DESHMUKH & SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, JJ. Dated : October 21, 2010 PER COURT :- 1. Heard respective counsel. 2. Shri Wani, learned Advocate for respondent No.3 fairly concedes that though copy of this Civil Application has been received by him, no reply has been filed. He, however, opposes the application by oral submissions, with leave of this Court. 3. Shri Kulkarni, learned Advocate for applicant / association points out paragraph Nos.2 and 3 of this civil application and submits that after getting copy of the affidavit in reply on behalf of respondent No.3, the applicant came to know about issuance of letter by the Director of Municipal Administration dt.12.2.2007 coupled with the Circular dt. 2 28.10.2004. He, therefore, submits that this application be allowed. 4. Shri Wani, learned Advocate points out the conduct of the petitioner. According to him, the petition was filed on 6.8.2010. Petition was before this Court on 19.11.2008. Notices were issued and interim relief was granted directing parties to maintain status quo, so far possession is concerned. Shri Wani, learned Advocate made a grievance that the members of the applicant are occupying various shops/ tenements but have not paid rent since 1.4.2008 and that they are enjoying the property rent free taking aid of the ad-interim relief granted by this Court, ex-parte, on 19.11.2008. He points out the conduct of the applicant that affidavit in reply of respondent No.3 council was filed on 20.3.2009 and copy thereof was served on learned counsel for the applicant. According to him, present application was sworn by deponent on 17.4.2008 but it came to be filed in this Court on 15.10.2008. Further according to him, the applicant association is protracting the litigation after the order of status quo granted by this Court. 5. Writ court cannot be utilized only for getting the interim reliefs and protracting the matter. [See Kalabharati Advertising Vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania [JT 2010 (9) SC 382]. We have taken into consideration the conduct of the applicant. In our view, this application can be favourably considered but the applicant can be directed to deposit arrears of rent so also regular rent with respondent No.3 Council, subject to further order to be passed by this Court in the main petition. Apart 3 from this, we are also inclined to impose cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand only/-) on the applicant association for grant of this application. Shri Kulkarni, learned Advocate informs this Court, on instructions, that there are 200 members of the applicant/association. 6. In the result, Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (A) and (B) with costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand only/-). The members of the applicant association are directed to deposit arrears of rent from 1.4.2008 till 31.10.2010 with respondent No.3 Municipal Council within two weeks from today and shall continue to deposit the monthly rent from 1.11.2010 and onwards with respondent No.3 on/or before 10th of respective month regularly until further orders of this Court. Respondent No.3 Municipal Council shall issue receipts on receiving the rent to the concerned. 7. List the Writ Petition on 25.11.2010. Applicant shall carry out the amendment to the writ petition and place amended writ petition on record and serve copies thereof on learned counsel for respective parties. (SHRIHARI P.DAVARE J.) (S.B.DESHMUKH, J.) ... akl