← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/8898/2024disposed off

Myrah Hospitality Llp Thr. Ira Authorized Signatory Vijay R. Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

2024-06-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice B.P. Colabawalla , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Digitally signed by TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Date:

2024.06.27 17:53:02 +0530 TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8898 OF 2024 Myrah Hospitality LLP .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

.. Respondents Mr. Pralhad Paranjape, Ms.Shubhra Paranjape, Mr.Manish Kelkar, Mr.Aditya Mhase a/w Mr.Yash Tembe, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms.S.D.Vyas, Addl.G.P. a/w Ms. D.M.Kapadia, A.G.P. for the State

CORAM:

B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.

DATE:

P. C.

1.

The above Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to Respondent No.3 to forthwith pass an order in relation to the hearing held by him on 5th June 2024 in relation to FLR 112024/6064/FL-3 City 4350 as per the Notice dated 28th May 2024. The other relief sought is to quash and set aside the Show Cause Notices / Orders dated 8th May 2024, 22nd May 2024 and 28th May 2024. The Show Cause Notice dated 8th May 2024 was issued to the Petitioner to show cause as to why his license should not be suspended.

The Orders dated 22nd May 2024 and 28th May 2024 have suspended the liquor license granted to the Petitioner indefinitely. 2.

The grievance made by the Petitioner is that under no circumstances can the license be suspended indefinitely and the authorities ought to pass an order in relation to the Petitioner's case in which a hearing took place on 5th June 2024.

3.

The learned Advocate submitted that in the facts of Petitioner's case, the violations alleged are all compoundable and do not warrant suspension of the license. He therefore, submitted that the suspension orders ought to be stayed till the order is passed by Respondent No.3 in the case of the Petitioner.

4.

We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner at some length. We are not inclined to stay the suspension order because we are inclined to direct Respondent No.3 to pass its order in relation to the hearing held by him on 5th June 2024 (Petitioner's case) within a period of two weeks from today. Once this is the case, we do not think that the suspension order ought to be stayed because on the passing of the order by Respondent No.3,

the suspension order will automatically come to an end, unless some punishment is imposed for the alleged offences. 5.

In these circumstances, we dispose of this Writ Petition by directing Respondent No.3 to pass an order in relation to the hearing held by him on 5th June 2024 in relation to FLR 112024/6064/FL-3 City 4350 as expeditiously as possible, and in any event, within a period of two weeks from today. Needless to add that we have not opined on the merits of the matter which shall be decided by Respondent No.3 whilst passing its order. 6.

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

7.

This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax [FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]