-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.557 OF 200 WRIT PETITION NO.557 OF 200 WRIT PETITION NO.557 OF 2008 Jaysingrao Bhausaheb Patil and ors. .. Petitioners. Vs Authorised Enquiry Officer, ... and ors. .. Respondents. Mr Amit B.Borkar, for the petitioners. Mr S.D.Rayrikar, AGP for respondent no.3. CORAM : D.B.Bhosale,J. CORAM : D.B.Bhosale,J. CORAM : D.B.Bhosale,J. DATE : 11.02.08. DATE : 11.02.08. DATE : 11.02.08. PC: PC: PC: 1, Heard Mr Borkar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr Rayrikar, learned AGP for respondent no.3. 2. Mr Borkar, learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, submits that all the petitioners have filed a substantive appeal against the order dated 8.8.2007 before respondent no.3 on 18.12.2007. He further submits that the petitioners have also filed an application for stay but so far respondent no.3 has not passed orders on the said application and hence the petitioners have approached this court for an interim order during pendency of their appeal before respondent no.3. Considering the nature of controversy involved in the instant writ -2- petition and the overall facts and circumstances of the case I am satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice. 3. All the petitioners shall file an undertaking in this court in the form of affidavit within a period of 10 days from today declaring a list of immovable properties standing in their names with an undertaking that they shall not dispose of those properties till the appeal filed before respondent no.3 dated 18.12.2007 is finally decided and for a period of two weeks therefrom. Respondent no.3 shall endeavour to decide the petitioners’ application for stay as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks from today. It is always open for respondent no.3 to dispose of the appeal itself within the aforestated period of eight weeks if no orders are passed on the stay application. Till the stay application is heard and decided by respondent no.3, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners. It is open for the petitioners to rely on the judgment in Shriram Dhonduji Raut Vs. Bahu Uddesiyab Sahakari Sanstha Virsi and ors, 2004 (3) Bom CR 383, as relied upon by Mr Borkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, in the instant writ petition before the appellate authority. -3- 4. At this stage, Mr Borkar submits that during pendency of the writ petition, petitioner no.1 has expired and in view thereof his heirs and legal representatives will file an undertaking in pursuance of this order. His statement is accepted. It is needless to express that the learned counsel for the petitioners shall serve a copy of the undertakings, to be filed in this court, to the learned AGP appearing for respondent no.3. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale,J.) (D.B.Bhosale,J.) (D.B.Bhosale,J.)