1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 933 OF 2008 Murlidhar Bandu Malunjkar (since deceased) through his heirs and legal representatives Rajaram Murlidhar Malunjkar & Ors. ... Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. Ms. Leena Patil for the Petitioners. Mr. A.S. Shitole, APP for the Respondents. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 12th JANUARY 2010. P.C. :- Miscellaneous Application No.1 of 2007 in Special Case No.16 of 2005 filed under the M.P.I.D. Act has been allowed by the Trial Court and that is how the Petitioners have approached this Court. 2. By the order dated 12th January 2007, the learned Judge presiding as a Special Judge in this case has directed that Respondent Nos.2,3,4,5 and 6 to this application who are the authorities under the Land Revenue Code viz. Sub-Registrar, Tahasildar and Talathi should not give any effect to any agreement for sale of the lands and the State Government was directed to attach the lands for which sale deed/agreement for sale are made with one M/s. Parasrampuria Plantations Limited. 2 3. The directions in the order are to the following effect :- “1. Respondent Nos.2,3,4,5 and 6 are directed not to effect any sale of lands of which Agreement of sale is made with Applicants/Accused Parasrampuria Plantations Limited and possession is handed over to Applicants/Accused Parasrampuria Plantatiions Limited by executing Kabjepavti in favour of Applicants/Accused Plantations Limited. 2. The State of Maharashtra – Respondent No.1 is directed to attach the land of which Sale Deed Agreement of Sale is made with Parasrampuria Plantations Limited and possession of land is handed over to Parasrampuria Plantations Company by executing Kabje pavti. 3. Further, Applicants/Accused Parasrampuria Plantations Limited are directed to give specific limits of land, survey No. name of landlord area of the land and Kabje pavti to the police for enabling them to take immediate action. Upon receiving such information from the Applicants/Accused Parasrampuria Plantation Limited, Respondent No.1 should take diligent steps to attach lands. 3 4. Misc. Application of the Applicants/Accused Parasrampuria Plantation Company is disposed of with the above said directions.” 4. The only contention raised by Ms. Patil, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner is that the learned Special Judge ought not to have allowed this Application unless all affected parties were heard. The order is passed behind their back and more particularly without insisting upon the Company impleading the Petitioners as parties thereto. 5. In paragraph 5 of this Writ Petition, the Petitioners have stated that they have not entered into any agreement to sell much less sale deed nor have they handed over their property nor any kabje pavti executed in favour of the said Company. However, they were informed in the month of December 2008 that in so far as record of rights of their lands are concerned, necessary entries have been made. The Petitioners’ claim to be owners of several lands, details of which are set out in paragraph 1 of this Petition. 6. After having heard the learned Advocate appearing for the parties at some length, I am of the opinion that this Writ Petition will have to be allowed on the short ground that the Petitioners ought to have been heard by the learned Special Judge before he passed any order on the application before him. In such circumstances, finding that the order is violative 4 of the principles of natural justice, it is accordingly quashed and set aside. The Misc. Application is restored to the file of the Trial Court/the learned Special Judge for being decided afresh on merits and in accordance with law but after giving fresh notice to the Petitioners. Respondent No.7 M/s. Parasrampuria Plantations Limited shall amend the memo of the Misc. Application filed in the Trial Court and implead the present Petitioners as Respondents thereto. They shall be served with the memo of the application and all related papers. After ensuring due and proper service, the learned Judge to hear the application and pass orders in accordance with law without being influenced by his earlier order. All this shall be done by the learned Judge within a period of 8 weeks from the date of the receipt of the order of this Court. The attachment levied to continue for a period of 8 weeks from today but without prejudice to the rights and contentions of all parties. 7. Needless to state that the order of the Special Judge is set aside only in so far as the present Petitioners are concerned and he will be obliged to hear them before any adverse order is passed against them. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)