1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 816 OF 2010. Bhimraj Chandrabhan Mandhalkar and another -: versus :- State of Maharashtra and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 24 , 2010. Heard Shri S.M. Puranik, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri Kothari, learned A.G.P. for respondents and Shri D.V. Chauhan, learned Counsel for Intervenors. It is apparent that the Hon'ble Minister has adhered to the policy decision of the Government in the matter and therefore has restored the orders dated 17.04.2008 whereby the functioning of FL-III licence of present petitioners was suspended because of complaint made by intervenors. The intervenors claim to be the legal heirs of deceased Chandrabhan and therefore, entitled to benefit in that licence. Petitioners are disputing their relationship and entitlement. In this situation, I find that it will be appropriate if the petitioners approach the Civil Court for ventilation of their grievance and obtain appropriate orders including the 2 orders for further continuation of their shop during the pendency of the suit. This Court has on 06.11.2009 while passing orders in Writ Petition No. 2940/2009 after hearing the parties accepted the following as interim arrangement : “The learned counsel for intervenor points out that petitioners are using the licence and doing business today, and hence they should be directed to maintain day to day accounts, so that ultimately the equities can be worked out. Considering the nature of controversy, the petitioners are directed to maintain accounts during the pendency of the matter before respondent no.1. Learned counsel for intervenor states that intervenor should be permitted to inspect the business and accounts once in a month. However, the request need not be considered at this stage. Learned counsel state that intervenor also had filed appeal in the matter. The said appeal should also be disposed along with the present matter.” Shri Chauhan, learned counsel states that, that arrangement was then accepted by the intervenors only because appeal was to be decided by the Hon'ble Minister. He states that as final adjudication would take considerable time such arrangement is not acceptable to intervenors. He therefore, suggested 2-3 alternate arrangements. However, I find that the said proposals can be looked into by the Civil Court after hearing the parties. Till the Civil Court passes further appropriate orders, interim order for continuing shop in view of the interim arrangement made by this Court to continue. Petitioner is 3 given time of six weeks from today to file appropriate Civil Suit before the Competent Court and to obtain interim orders therein regarding further continuation of his FL-III licence. The Civil Court shall while considering the application for temporary injunction, if moved, be guided by its own prudence and shall not be influenced by the interim arrangement accepted by this Court in any way. Shri Puranik, learned counsel for petitioners has pointed out that after this Court issued notice on 17.02.2010, because of the orders of the Hon'ble Minister his FL-III licence has been again suspended on 21.02.2010. In view of the orders being passed, the petitioner is permitted to continue his FL-III licence and till further appropriate orders in this respect are passed by the Civil Court as aforesaid. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioners to open his FL-III Shop and to function it in accordance with the law in the meanwhile. Writ Petition is disposed of in view of the aforesaid directions, with no order as to cost. Certified copy expedited. JUDGE Rgd.