SSK/910/sb 1 WP.1942.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1942 OF 2011 Shri Vivekanand Rai ....Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. P. C. Kansara i/b. M/s. Kansara & Thanekar, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. R. M. Patne, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 4. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATED : 8TH MARCH, 2011. P.C.: Heard Mr. Kansara, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Patne, learned AGP for the respondents. 2. Rule. By consent of the parties, rule is made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing. 3. By an order dated 21st February, 2011, respondent no.2 cancelled the premises licence of the petitioner’s establishment on the grounds mentioned in the said order. By a separate order dated 25th February, 2011, the cancellation order was stayed up to 9th March, SSK/910/sb 2 WP.1942.11 2011. The order cancelling the premises licence was served upon the petitioner on 23rd February, 2011 and the petitioner immediately thereafter on 28th February, 2011 has preferred an appeal along with application for stay under the provisions of Section 33 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 before the Collector-Respondent No.3. The respondent no.3 has not passed any orders either in the application for stay or in the appeal. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that neither the appeal was heard nor any order was passed in the application for stay by respondent no.3-Appellate Authority and he apprehends that after 9th March, 2011 the authorities under the Act will insist for implementation of the order impugned in the appeal. 5. I find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. If the order passed by the 2nd respondent is subject to the appeal and in fact, appeal is filed within the stipulated period along with an application for stay, it is obligatory on the Appellate Authority to pass appropriate order on the application for stay. Since no order was passed by the Appellate Authority, in my opinion, the operation of order of cancellation of the premises licence in respect of the petitioner’s establishment deserves to be stayed. In the above facts and circumstance, the petition is disposed of, by passing the following order: SSK/910/sb 3 WP.1942.11 1. The respondent no.3-Appellate Authority is directed to hear and dispose of the petitioner’s appeal which is annexed at Exhibit “F” to the petition along with the stay application as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of six weeks from the receipt of writ of this order. 2. During the pendency and final disposal of the appeal the effect, operation and implementation of the order dated 21st February, 2011 passed by the respondent no.2 in respect of the petitioner’s establishment “Hotel Highway Inn” situated at 194, Sambhapur, Taluka-Hatkangale, District-Kolhaur shall remain stayed. 3. In the event of passing of any adverse order by respondent no.3 in the aforesaid appeal, the same shall not be given effect for a period of two weeks from the date of communication of the same to the petitioner. (RANJIT MORE, J.)