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 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 606 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 606 OF 2009 WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 606 OF 2009 Indusind Media & Communications & Anr. .. Petitioners. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr. Aspi Chinoy a/w Mr. V.R. Dhond, Mr. A.S. Kamat i/by Crawford Bayley & Co. for Petitioners. Mr. D.A. Nalawade, G.P., for Respondent State. CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE: 25TH MARCH, 2009. DATE: 25TH MARCH, 2009. DATE: 25TH MARCH, 2009. P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition can be disposed of at the stage of admission itself. 3. The petitioners have approached this Court for seeking a writ in the nature of an order or direction 2 to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to withdraw the impugned orders dated 18.3.2009 annexed to the petition as Exhibits "O", "P" and "Q" for setting aide and quashing the same along with further ancillary reliefs. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the impugned orders have been passed without giving them an opportunity of hearing and, therefore, it vitiates the orders which call upon the respondents to pay entertainment duty along with the penalty and further the orders are passed in a proforma by filling in the blanks which speaks for itself. 5. In order to satisfy ourselves we called upon the learned Government Pleader to place on record the proceedings relating to the entertainment duty which has been assessed by the respondents in the case of the petitioners pursuant to which the impugned orders came to be passed. 6. On going through the records and proceedings, prima facie we are satisfied that the orders have been passed without following the principles of natural justice i.e. without giving a fair opportunity to the petitioners to the extent of deciding the matter even without furnishing the particulars of the survey 3 reports purported to be conducted by the respondent authority which is the basic foundation for passing of the impugned orders and, therefore, we quash and set aside the impugned orders, remit the matter to the respondent no. 3 and direct him to furnish the survey reports of the period for which entertainment duty is to be assessed in accordance with law as required under the Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923. On furnishing the survey report, the respondent no. 3 would take written acknowledgement from the petitioners. On receipt of the survey report, the petitioners will file their reply within seven days and thereafter the respondent no. 3 may fix a date of hearing the petitioners shall file their written statement on record and will also be given an opportunity of being heard and represented through a counsel. In case the order requires the petitioners to pay entertainment duty and penalty levied on the same, the petitioners would be given at least seven days time before the order is implemented from the date the order is furnished to the petitioners and their acknowledgement to that effect is obtained. 4 7. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (V.K. Tahilramani, J.) (V.K. Tahilramani, J.) (V.K. Tahilramani, J.)