ASHOK SAW MILL DAHIWANDI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) The petitioner, who claims to be owner of the saw mill, by this petition has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 6.6.2002, suspending the license of the saw mill of the petitioner and putting a seal by the respondents. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing and setting aside the show cause notice dated 13.09.2001. The petitioner has also prayed that the respondents be directed to permit the petitioner to run the saw mill at the existing place and to renew the license of the same in accordance with law by issuing writ of mandamus.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner Shri Dhakne has stated before us that the subject matter of challenge in the present petition is also the subject matter of challenge in an appeal filed by the petitioner before Respondent No.2 and the said appeal is still pending. In the light of the fact that Respondent No.2 is seized of the dispute between the respective parties, we decline to interfere in this petition and relegate the petitioner to pursue the remedy which is opted by him. In the light of that since the appeal is pending for last more than two years, we direct Respondent No.2 to decide the appeal within a period of four months. Accordingly, the petitioner to appear before Respondent No.2 on 24th March, 2008 and Respondent No.2 to decide the said appeal within four months of 24th March, 2008 in accordance with law. Since we have not adjudicated on any of the issues involved in the present petition, all issues are kept open.