1 Mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1028 OF 2009 AMZ Marine Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.)..PETITIONER Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. )...RESPONDENTS Mr. K.P. Anilkumar for the petitioenrs. Mr.Bharat Mehta, AGP for respondent No.1. Mr. Murlidhar B. Kale for respondent No.2. Mr. Adesh Gurav i/b. Prakash Mahadik, for respondent No.3. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.V.MORE, JJ. DATE : 7TH JUNE, 2010 P.C. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. On behalf of the respondent No.3, who had originally filed appearance, their learned Counsel states that they have now no instructions. Same statements have been made since last several dates. However, respondent No.3 has made no steps to file their fresh appearance. 3. The controversy involved is whether the petitioners had notice of hearing before passing of the impugned order. It is the contention of the petitioners that they had no notice and consequently the order without notice to them is liable to be set aside as it has the effect of affecting their civil rights. 4. On behalf of the Board the affidavit has been filed by Shri D.H.Choudhary. 2 In the said affidavit at paragraph 3 it is pointed out that notices were sought to be served in November and December, 2006. It is set out that the petitioners could not be served because they had left. The respondent No.2 tried its best to find out the petitioners new address but failed and in these circumstances the respondent No.2 proceeded to pass the impugned order without hearing the petitioners. 5. On behalf of the petitioners learned Counsel submits that their stevedores license was not renewed since 2000 and they have not been in operation since then. 6. Considering that the petitioners had no opportunity and their civil rights have been affected the impugned order dated 29th March, 2008 is set aside and consequently the recovery notice dated 5th April, 2009 is also set aside. The Petitioner and respondent No.3 to remain present before the respondent No.2 on 22nd June, 2010 at 10.30 a.m. The respondent No.2 thereafter to give a date for hearing the matter. If the petitioners fail to appear it will be open t the respondent No.2 to proceed and dispose of the matter according to law. 7. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. ( R.V.MORE, J.) (F. I. REBELLO, J.)