21.wp.2753.09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2753 OF 2009 Barshi Taluka Saw Mills and Timber Merchant Sanstha, Barshi. ..Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and another. ..Respondents. .... Mr.G.S. Godbole, Advocate i/b. Mr.Ashok B. Tajane, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.S.S. Bhende, A.G.P., for respondent Nos.1 & 2. .... CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH, AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATED : 9TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C.:­ 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties 2. The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Act. It is a representative of persons who are carrying on business of sawmill on land belonging to Barshi Municipal Council, Barshi. It appears that Barshi Municipal Council has passed a resolution deciding to shift the timber market. 21.wp.2753.09 2 Against that resolution, proceedings under Section 308 of the Maharashtra Nagar Parishad, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Township Act were filed before the Collector. The Collector rejected the application of the petitioner, against which Revision is filed under Section 318 of the Maharashtra Nagar Parishad, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Township Act before the State Government which is pending before the State Government. It appears that a Civil Suit is also filed by the petitioner before the Civil Court claiming a direction to the Municipal Council not to evict them from their present premises. In that Civil Suit, we have been told that statement has been made by the Municipal Council that they will not evict the present petitioners without following due process of law. In this background, it appears that P.I.L. No.164 of 2007 was filed in this Court. To that petition, the petitioner was not made a party. In that Petition, on 31st January, 2008, following order was passed : " Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation as well as the State submit that they would treat this Writ Petition as representation of the petitioners and examine the same and pass appropriate orders 21.wp.2753.09 3 within 8 weeks from today. The petition is disposed of accordingly with no order to costs." 3. It is clear from the order quoted above that the State Government is to take a decision in the matter of shifting of the timber market. After the petitioners came to know of these development, they have made a representation to the Government that before taking any decision pursuant to the statement made by the Government before this Court which is reflected in the aforesaid order they should be granted an opportunity of being heard. That representation, admittedly, is pending before the State Government. 4. Two reliefs are claimed in this petition, (1) that the State Government should be directed to grant the petitioner an opportunity of being heard before taking any decision in the matter of shifting of timber market pursuant to the statement recorded in the aforesaid order of this Court, and (2) that the State Government should be directed to decide the representation of the petitioner which is pending before it expeditiously. Considering these facts, in our opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice : 21.wp.2753.09 4 :: O R D E R :: (i) The State Government shall consider the representation filed by the petitioners, copies of which are annexed to the Petition before taking any decision pursuant to the statement that is made by the State Government before this Court, which is recorded in the order dated 31st January, 2008. (ii) The State Government is directed to hear and dispose of the Revision filed by the present petitioners against the resolution of the Municipal Council, Barshi as expeditiously as possible in any case within 16 weeks from the date on which writ of this order is served on the State Government, in accordance with law. (iii) Rule is made absolute according. No order as to costs. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J) (K.K. TATED,J)