1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1803/2011 (M/s Matsya Yojna Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. VERSUS State of Maharashtra & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.J. Kharbade, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. I.L. Bodade, A.G.P. for the R-1. Shri M.I. Dhatrak, counsel for the R-4. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 15 , 2011 . Heard. The main ground of challenge in this writ petition is that the Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Nagpur granted stay in the revision application filed by the respondent no.4 till the final disposal of the revision, without hearing the petitioner on the issue of grant of interim relief. It appears, on hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned order dated 31.03.2011, that the order was passed without hearing the petitioner and without issuing notice to the petitioner-Society. Since the order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, it is necessary to modify the order passed by the respondent no.1 on 31.03.2011 by granting ad-interim stay only till the returnable date. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order passed by the respondent no.1 on 31.03.2011 is modified. The stay granted by the respondent no.1 would not operate till the final disposal of the revision and it would be 2 necessary for the respondent no.1 to consider the issue of confirmation of stay after hearing the petitioner on the next date of hearing. It is informed to this Court by the learned counsel for the respondent no.4 that the matter is fixed before the respondent no.4 on 10.06.2011. Hence, the ad-interim stay granted by the respondent no.1 would operate till 10.06.2011 and the question of confirming the stay granted in favour of the respondent no.4 would be considered by the respondent no.1, after hearing the petitioner on that date. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE