bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3393 & 3398 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3393 & 3398 OF 2009 PETITION NO. 3393 & 3398 OF 2009 Shri Sanjay Devidas Sathe ... Petitioner (in both petitions) v/s The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents (in both petitions) Mr.J.Shekhar i/by M/s.J.Shekhar & Co. for the petitioner in both petitions. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 4. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 22ND APRIL, 2009 22ND APRIL, 2009 22ND APRIL, 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. The petitioner in both these petitions is aggrieved by the notice issued to him by the respondent No.1 to remain present before the authority for hearing his appeal. According to the petitioner, the authority instead of hearing the appeal and deciding the said application, has merely directed the petitioner to remain present before it. It is contended that the petitioner apprehends coercive action would be taken against him regarding cancellation of the licence issued to him for extracting sand and penalty would be recovered from him for the alleged breaches committed by 2 the petitioner. 2. Both these petitions can be conveniently disposed of by directing the respondent No.1 to decide the appeal within a period of six weeks from today. In case it is not possible to decide the appeal itself, the 1st respondent will, in any event, decide the stay application within that period. Till then, the order dated 24.3.2009 directing that no coercive steps should be taken, will continue. 3. Writ petitions disposed of accordingly.