1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4349 OF 2010 (Sau. Dhrupadabai U. Chauhan vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. SEPTEMBER 07, 2010. Heard Shri Tathod, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Joshi, learned AGP for respondents No. 1, 2 & 4, Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 and Shri Saboo, learned counsel for respondent No.5. The petitioner contends that Chief Executive Officer (CEO) has not conducted any enquiry and hence the controversy is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Nimba Yadav Bhoi vs. President, Standing Committee, Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon, reported at 2002 (3) Mh.L.J. 466. The respective counsel for the respondents pointed out that after receipt of report of Block Development Officer (BDO), CEO has independently applied its mind and issued show cause notices and heard the petitioner. Shri Saboo, learned counsel has contended that all complainants at whose instance action was initiated against the petitioner, have not been joined as 2 parties either before the State Government in appeal or before this Court. According to him, the prayer for stay made by the petitioner should be allowed to be considered by the appellate authority only. I have perused the records produced before this Court by Shri Deshpande, learned counsel. I find it appropriate to permit the appellate authority to consider the entire controversy. The appeal has been filed by the petitioner in August 2010 and till date no hearing has taken place. In the circumstances, the appellate authority shall attempt to decide the appeal itself on merits as early as possible and in any case within four weeks from the date of communication of this order to it. The parties are directed to appear before the appellate Court on 21st September 2010 and to abide by its further directions in the matter. Shri Tathod, learned counsel has pointed out that the Election Programme to fill in the vacancies is duly published. In this view of the matter, interim orders granted by this Court on 03.09.2010 to continue as interim order during the pendency of the appeal. With this directions and observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be furnished to AGP. JUDGE *GS.