Manoj Baburao Amrutkar v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:35501

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 901 WRIT PETITION NO. 8743 OF 2022 MANOJ BABURAO AMRUTKAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS .....

Mr. V. S. Badakh, AGP for the Respondent/State Mr. S. S. Patil, Advocate for Respondent Nos.6 and 7. CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.

DATE : 16th DECEMBER, 2025 P. C. :- 1.

On 11th December, 2025, following order was passed. "1. On 29.09.2023, this Court passed the following order : "1. None present for the petitioner.

2. On 21.08.2023, it was brought to the notice of this court by the learned counsel appearing for respondents no.6 and 7 that although the petitioner was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, by interim order dated 24.08.2022, he has not deposited the amount. 2 cheques were issued by the petitioner and both were returned with remarks insufficient funds. The petitioner was called upon to make submissions on this aspect. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 31.08.2023. At the mentioning stage, in the morning, the learned counsel had prayed for adjournment by consent. It is noted that the matter would be adjourned to 29.09.2023, but the circulation note was not given although the 901 WP 8743.2022.odt

matter was mentioned for adjournment.

3. This matter is called up today again. It is brought to my notice again that the amount as directed has not been deposited. The petition pertains to recovery of the amount, which the petitioner had borrowed from respondent no.6. The recovery certificate issued by the authority and, thereafter, attachment order is also passed in pursuance of the recovery certificate, which is challenged in the present petition and the interim stay was granted by this court, subject to deposit of Rs.3,00,000/-, but the amount is not deposited.

4. The learned counsel for respondents no.6 and 7 submits that the amounts are neither deposited nor paid.

5. Thus, the interim relief granted by this court is vacated.

6. List this matter for dismissal, on 13.10.2023."

2. Today also, none appears for the petitioner.

3. List the petition on 16.12.2025 in the urgent orders category under the caption 'For Dismissal'.

2.

Today, also none appears for the Petitioner.

3.

In view of this, petition stands dismissed-in-default for want of prosecution.

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) ssp 901 WP 8743.2022.odt