AGK IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.746 OF 2008 PETITION NO.746 OF 2008 PETITION NO.746 OF 2008 Shri Shankar Sheshu Shetty of M/s.Akshay Bar & Restaurant ...Petitioner Versus. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Shri P.C.Kansara for the Petitioner. Shri R.R.Bhosale, A.G.P for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. : ABHAY S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 31st MARCH, 2008. : 31st MARCH, 2008. : 31st MARCH, 2008. ORAL ORAL ORAL JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT: 1. Rule. The learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service for the respondent Nos.1 to 5. Considering the narrow controversy involved in the petition, the same is immediately taken up for final disposal. 2. By order dated 26th February, 2008 passed by the third respondent (Deputy Commissioner of Police, Greater Mumbai) the police licence granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The said order records that the petitioner may prefer an appeal to the State Government within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the said order. The order also records that on the failure to prefer an appeal within 30 days from receipt of the order, the order of cancellation of licence will be automatically : 2 : 2 : 2 : implemented. 3. Accordingly, an appeal was preferred by the appellants on 15th March, 2008. There was an application for stay filed by the petitioner in the said appeal. The said application (Exhibit C) was filed on 18th March, 2008. 4. The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that as of today, no orders have been passed on the stay application made by the petitioner. The substantive prayer in this petition is for quashing the order dated 26th February, 2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner. In the alternative, a prayer has been made seeking the writ of mandamus against the appellate authority enjoining the said authority to decide the appeal or stay application. 5. The learned A.G.P appearing for the respondents stated that the stay application could not be decided as the Legislative Assembly is in session. 6. The petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal as provided in order dated 26th February, 2008 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the said : 3 : 3 : 3 : order. An application for stay was also preferred by the petitioner within the stipulated period of 30 days. As the appellate authority has not considered the application for stay on merits, now, the order of cancellation of licence which is subject matter of challenge in the appeal may operate. The order specifically notes that in case appeal is not preferred within the period of 30 days, the order of cancellation of licence will be implemented. Though the appeal is preferred by the petitioner within the stipulated period of 30 days, only because the appellate authority could not find time to decide the application for stay, the order of cancellation of license will become operative. This will defeat the very object of providing for an appeal against the order of cancellation of licence. Therefore, the appellate authority will have to be directed to decide the application for stay within a time bound schedule and limited protection will have to be granted to the petitioner. This course will have to be adopted considering the peculiar facts of the case. 7. Hence, I pass the following order: (i) The appellate authority is directed to hear and decide the application for stay : 4 : 4 : 4 : preferred by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today. (ii) The order passed on the application for stay will be communicated to the petitioner at the address of the petitioner mentioned in the cause title of this petition within a period of one week from the date of decision. (iii) The order dated 26th February, 2008 of cancellation of licence shall not be implemented till the disposal of the stay application by the appellate authority and for a period of two weeks from the date of communication of the order passed on stay application to the petitioner, in case the said order is adverse to the petitioner. (iv) All contentions of the parties in the pending appeal and application for stay are expressly kept open. (v) It is made clear that the appellate authority will decide the application for : 5 : 5 : 5 : stay without being influenced by the grant of a limited protection to the petitioner. (vi) Rule is partly made absolute in above terms. (vii) There will be no orders as to costs. (viii) Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. (A.S.Oka, (A.S.Oka, (A.S.Oka, J) J) J)