Shashi Gurbux Pahilani v. The Collector Of Pune And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION (SR. NO.6) WRIT PETITION NO.864 OF 2026 Gurbux Pahilani of Pune ....Petitioner
Versus
The Collector Of Pune, State Excise Dept. & Ors.
....Respondents AND (SR. NO.7) WRIT PETITION NO. 865 OF 2026 Prakash C Mulchandani ....Petitioner
Versus
The Collector Of Pune, State Excise Dept. & Ors.
....Respondents AND (SR. NO.8) WRIT PETITION NO. 866 OF 2026 Shashi Gurbux Pahilani ....Petitioner
Versus
The Collector Of Pune & Ors.
....Respondents ---- Ms. Veena Thadani a/w Ms. Rutuja Gaikwad, Advocate for the Petitioners in all the Writ Petitions.
Mr. B.V. Samant, Addl. G.P. a/w. Mrs. Nisha Mehra, AGP for Respondent- State in WP/864/2026.
Mrs. Devyani Deshmukh, AGP, for Respondent-State in WP/865/2026.
Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP, for the Respondent -State in WP/866/2026. ---- CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : 29th JANUARY, 2026
P.C. :- 1.
The learned AGP has tendered the photostat copies of the reports (5 pages) along with the documents, in deference to our order dated 21.01.2026. Each of these compilations is marked as 'X' for identification in each of these Petitions. 2.
We have perused the report (undated), which contains several mistakes in Marathi language.
Several incorrect/inappropriate words are typed. The report is digitally signed by Mr. Santosh Jagdale, Deputy Superintendent, State Excise, Pune, on 26.01.2026 (a National holiday). It is apparent that Mr. Jagdale has not even read the report properly and has digitally signed it with several mistakes in the words used. We could have recommended the case of this Officer for some action considering that it is visible that he has not even read the report. 3.
Be that as it may, the learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners have tendered detailed replies to the notices issued by the Department. If the Department considers the said replies in the light of the report marked 'X', a decision could be taken by the Department and the same may be communicated to the Petitioners as early as possible. The department submits that reasoned orders would be passed.
4.
In view of the above, we direct the RespondentDepartment to consider the replies of the Petitioners in the backdrop of the report marked 'X' in each of these matters and pass a reasoned order within seven working days from today. The reasoned order would be served upon the Petitioners on their e-mail addresses, which are mentioned as under :
(i) gkenterprises663@gmail.com (ii) aparnawines104@gmail.com (iii) wingatewing2525@gmail.com 5.
Needless to state, if any adverse order is passed, the Petitioners would be at liberty to avail of a remedy as is permissible in law. If an order imposing a penalty is passed, or if the offences are compoundable, the order to be passed would contain a reference to the same. Upon payment of the penalty or upon compounding of the offences by completing the legal formalities, the Department shall un-seal the shops within 24 hours from the passing of the order.
6.
In view of the above, these three Writ Petitions are disposed off.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)