1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5415 OF 2009 Vasantkumar s/o Ghanshamdas Houzwala, Age 72 years, Occupation Trade, Residing at Kranti Chowk, Aurangabad .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary to the Government, State Excise Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The District Collector, Aurangabad .. RESPONDENTS Shri Hemant Surve, Advocate for petitioner Shri N.N.Jadhav, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondents CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 1st September 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V.HARDAS , 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. At the outset, Shri Surve, learned Counsel for the petitioner states on instructions that the petitioner does not press for the relief prayed for at prayer clause (B) to the petition but prays for liberty to raise at any appropriate proceedings in the event the 2 order in respect of the show cause notice dated 9.1.2007 is adverse to the interest of the petitioner. We see no impediment whatsoever in acceding the request of the petitioner and grant liberty as prayed for. 3. The petitioner by this petition challenging the initiating action against the petitioner on the basis of show cause notice dated 9.1.2007. It is stated in the petition that the hearing is scheduled on 1.8.2009. The learned Assistant Government Pleader states on instructions that the hearing is concluded but in the light of pendency of this petition, final order in respect of the hearing of show cause notice has not been passed. In the light of the fact that the hearing is concluded and final orders are awaited, we decline to interfere in respect of prayer clause (C) i.e. quashing of show cause notice. However, we direct that in the event an order adverse to the interest of the petitioner is passed, the same shall not be given effect for fifteen (15) days from the date of its receipt by the petitioner in order to avail the alternate remedies available to the petitioner in law, for challenging the same. We further make it clear that in the event the petitioner does avail the alternate remedies and submits an application for stay, the same to be decided by the appropriate authorities uninfluenced by the fact that we have passed an order directing that no effect be given to the adverse order, if passed, for a 3 period of fifteen days. In the circumstances, Rule stands discharged with the aforesaid liberty and directions. No costs. ( A.V.POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE vvr/5415.09wp 4