1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1555 OF 2010 1. NARAYAN S/O DNYANESHWAR KARLE Age : 48 YEARS, OCCU.LEGAL PRACTITIONER, AND AGRICULTURE, R/O RAHATA, TALUKA RAHATA, DISTRICT AHMEDNAGAR 2. SHIVAJI SITARAM LAHARE Age : 56 YEARS, OCCU.AGRICULTURE, R/O WADKI TQ. RAHATA, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR 3. SANJAY DIWANRAO SHELKE Age : 38 YEARS, OCCU.AGRICULTURE, R/O WADKI TQ. RAHATA, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR 4. RAMCHANDRA DADA BOTHE Age : 57 YEARS OCCU.AGRICULTURE, R/O RAHATA, TALUKA RAHATA, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR 5. BHAGWATRAO VISHWANATHRAO GORDE Age : 68 YEARS, OCCU.AGRICULTURE, R/O ASTGAON, TQ. RAHATA, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR ..PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY CO OPERATION DEPARTMENT MANTRALAY, MUMBAI 2. THE HONBLE MINISTER FOR CO-OPERATION MAHARASHTRA STATE, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI 3. THE REGIONAL JT. DIRECTOR (SUGAR) AHMEDNAGAR, DIST.AHMEDNAGAR 2 4. ANNA GAJABA WAGHE Age : 58 YEARS, OCCU.AGRICULTURE, R/O KELWAD, TQ. RAHATA, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR ..RESPONDENTS Shri V.D.Hon, Advocate for petitioners Mr.S.K.Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 Mr.V.R.Dhorde, Advoate holding for Mr.P.S.Dighe, Advocate for respondent No.4 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ DATE : 6th May 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. We have heard Mr.Hon, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Tambe, learned Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.V.R.Dhorde, learned Counsel for respondent No.4. 3. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners seek limited relief that in the event an adverse order is passed against the petitioners in appeal bearing Nos. 466/2009, 467/2009, 468/2009, 469/2009 and 470/4009, then the said order may not take effect for a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the said orders by the petitioners. 3 4. Mr.V.R.Dhorde, learned Counsel for respondent No.4 has strongly objected to the said relief. 5. Mr.Hon, learned Counsel for respondents 1 to 3 has invited our attention to the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 3884 of 2009 and many such orders passed in similar matters. 6. In the light of the above, we therefore, allow this petition and direct that in the event adverse orders are passed in Appeal Nos.466/2009, 467/2009, 468/2009, 469/2009 and 470/2009, then the same shall not take effect for a period of ten days from the date of the receipt of orders by the petitioners. 7. Rule is thus made absolute on above terms with no orders as to costs. ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/1555.10wp)