wp11130.10 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO.11130 OF 2010 PRAMOD SADASHIV SONAWANE AND ANR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ... Advocate for Petitioner(s) : Mr.Patil Vijay B. AGP for Respondent(s): Mr.D.R. Kale. Advocate for Respondent(s):Mr. Kutti Prassana N. Adv for R.Nos. 5. R/ 5 To 10 And 12 Served. ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. Dated: August 26, 2011 ... Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2 This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31st August, 2010 thereby granting interim order in favour of the revision applicant. It is the contention of the Counsel for the petitioners that the said order has been passed without assigning any reasons. The Commissioner has only wp11130.10 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ observed that the matter is of civil nature and will take long time to be decided and therefore, it is necessary to pass interim order to protect the interest of the revision applicant. It is further submitted that the petitioners herein filed application on 1st November, 2010 praying therein for vacating the interim relief granted by the revisional authority. However, the said application was decided by the revisional authority with observation that after hearing the applicants on 31st August, 2010, the interim order was passed till disposal of the revision and, therefore, such application cannot be entertained. Therefore, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that this writ petition deserves to be allowed. wp11130.10 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ 3 On the other hand, the learned Counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the order which was passed on the application dated 1st November, 2010 is not under challenge in this petition. The order dated 31st August, 2010 is under challenge and, therefore, this court may not consider the prayer of the petitioner to set aside the order passed by the revisional authority. 4 I have given due consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. In my opinion, the reasons given by the revisional authority while rejecting the application of the petitioner cannot be sustained. Merely, because the interim order has been passed after hearing the applicants, it would not take away the right of the respondents to wp11130.10 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ file objections after receipt of notice for continuing such interim order. Therefore, the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner on the application of the petitioners cannot be sustained. From perusal of the order dated 31st August, 2010, it is also apparent that no any reasons as such are recorded by the Divisional Commissioner while passing the said impugned order. However, since that order is operative till the date, it would be appropriate not to disturb the said order. However, it is necessary in the interest of justice to restore the application dt. 1st November, 2010 filed by the petitioners to its original file. 5 In that view of the matter, the application of the petitioners dated 1st wp11130.10 5 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ November, 2010 is restored to its original file and the order passed thereon is quashed and set aside. The revisional authority i.e. the Divisional Commissioner shall hear the parties on the application dated 1st November, 2010 and after giving the parties reasonable opportunity, pass appropriate orders on merits by assigning reasons. The said application should be decided by the revisional authority, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within two months from today. It is made clear that the interim order dt.31st August, 2010 is not disturbed. With the above observations, petition is disposed of. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) PLK/*