IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2887 OF 2009 Mansoor Abdul Rahim Patel ... Petitioner. Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Police, Zone II, Panvel & Ors. ... Respondents. --- WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2889 OF 2009 Mustaq Abdul Rahim Patel ... Petitioner. Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Police, Zone II, Panvel & Ors. ... Respondents. --- WITH WRIT PETITOIN NO. 2890 OF 2009 Aslam Abdul Rahim Patel ... Petitioner. Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Police, Zone II, Panvel & Ors. .. Respondents. ---- Mr. U. N. Tripathi for the Petitioners in all the Petitions. Ms. A.S. Pai, APP for the Respondents -State. --- CORAM : J. N. PATEL AND A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 05TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. : 1. Leave granted to amend the age of the mother of the petitioners in all the three petitions from 90 to 82. 2. Heard. 3. The main grievance of the petitioners in all these three petitions appears to be that the Appellate Authority is not expeditiously deciding their Appeals pending before it and have refused to grant stay during the pendency of the Appeals and that if the Appeals are decided after the period of externment is over, it will frustrate the very object of providing a remedy under the statute by way of Appeal. 4. On the other hand, the learned APP submits that in these three matters, the Appeals have been preferred by the petitioners on 22nd October, 2009. An Application for stay was filed on the next day i.e. 23rd October, 2009 and that the Appeals have been fixed for hearing on 13th November, 2009 and therefore, no fault can be attributed on the part of the Appellate Authority. As the petitioners themselves approached the Appellate Authority after 16 days, they cannot expect the Authority to act forthwith. 5. We, after considering the authorities on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners and in view of the fact that the Appeals are scheduled to be heard on 13th November, 2009, are not inclined to entertain these writ petitions but we make it clear that if the Appellate Authority is unable to take up the Appeals for hearing on 13th November, 2009, the petitioners will be at liberty to file an application for stay on that very day and the Appellate Authority would consider the application for stay under the changed circumstances, particularly, the delay on the part of the Appellate Authority in disposing of the Appeals. 6. We are required to issue the aforesaid directions for the very reason that the Appellate Authority should expeditiously decide the Appeals, if it is not inclined to grant stay in such matters and that the Appellate Authority should not postpone the hearing of the appeals in such matters so as to defeat the very purpose of filing the appeal which is a remedy provided under the Act to a person whose liberty is curtailed by the order of externment as enshrined under the Artcle 21 of the Constitution of India. With these observations, all the three petitions are disposed of by keeping all the issues and contentions open for the petitioners for being agitated before the Appellate Authority. 7. We further grant liberty to the petitioners to move the Misc. Application in these writ petitions in case the Appeal is not disposed of and the application for stay is rejected. (J. N. Patel, J) (A.A. Sayed,J) -----