1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2959/2008 Mohd. Sarik s/o Mohd. Shabbir ...Versus... Hon'ble Chief Minister, Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai – 32 and others -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri D.C. Chahande, Adv. for petitioner] [Shri A.M. Deshpande, AGP for respdt. Nos. 2 and 3] CORAM:- A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED :- 09.07.2008 Learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that ex-parte interim order made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister/Appellate Authority on 12.6.2008 is without jurisdiction and inasmuch Section 44 (4) of the Maharashtra Municipal Council and Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Townships (Second Amendment Act, 1995 prohibits such order being passed without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. He further argued that no further date has been given nor appeal is fixed for final hearing and ex-parte stay order is acting prejudicially to the interest of the petitioner. 2 A.G.P. for respondent Nos.2 and 3 opposed the writ petition. Proviso to sub-section 4 of the Section 44 of the Act shows that the State Government shall not make any order in appeal without hearing all the concerned parties. That obviously relates to the final order in the appeal and the same has no relevance with the interim orders passed in appeal. The impugned order shows that notices of final hearing will issue to the concerned parties, intimating the date and time of hearing of the appeal. The reliance placed by learned Counsel for the petitioner on proviso to Section 4 of Section 44 of the Act is thus obviously misplaced. In so far as second submission is concerned, the petitioner has remedy of approaching the Hon'ble Chief Minister by filing an application for vacating ex-parte stay and/or for final hearing of the appeal. But this Court sitting single has no jurisdiction to issue any direction relating to expeditious hearing of the appeal. There is no need to interfere with the ex-parte order made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister. The petition is, therefore, not entertained. The same is dismissed. JUDGE ssw