1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICMTURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 2736 of 1993 M/s Isco v. Union of India and ors Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr S.P. Hedaoo, Adv for petitioner. Ms Usha Tanna, Adv for respondent no.1. Mr Lambat, Adv for respdts 2 to 4. Coram : Swatanter Kumar, CJ and A.B. Chaudhari, J Dated : 21st February 2008 1. Learned counsel appearing for respondents no. 2 to 4 states that the petitioner has already handed over possession of the plot in question. He further states that the order dated 3rd June 1993 is based upon the Circular issued by the Railway Board while keeping in mind the market value of the property. 2. Be that as it may, fact of the matter is that the order dated 3rd June 1993 gives no details or reasons and has not provided any opportunity to the petitioner of being heard before enhancement of licence fee. If licence fee has been enhanced in terms of the agreement between the parties dated 12th 2 August 1982, the respondents should furnish complete details of the amounts claimed in the letter dated 3rd June 1993 within two weeks from today to which the petitioner would have a right to file reply and the respondents should pass final order thereupon. We make it clear that pendency of present writ petition right from the year 1993 till date would no way hamper or prejudice interest of respondents in recoverying the amount in accordance with law. If the petitioner fails to respond to the notice to be served by the respondents, demand in question shall become final and shall be executable in accordance with law. Chief Justice Judge hsj