← Library
Bombay High CourtIA/3766/2026disposed off

Tahsildar Uran v. Ram Dashrath Patil

2026-06-10Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre , Hon'Ble Justice Smt Manjusha Ajay Deshpande3 pages

Digitally signed by RUSHIKESH VISHNU PATIL Date:

2026.06.16 14:56:05 +0530 RUSHIKESH VISHNU PATIL 1/3 25 WP.4670.2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4670 OF 2023 Ram Dashrath Patil ..

Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..

Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3766 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4670 OF 2023 Tahsildar Uran ..

Applicant In the matter between:

Ram Dashrath Patil ..

Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..

Respondent ...

Mr. Surel Shah, Senior Advocate a/w Ms Priya Chaubey i/by Ms Sapana Rachure, for the Petitioner.

Adv. Anjani Kumar Singh, for Respondent Nos. 9 and 10. Mr. P. P. Kakade, Addl.G.P. a/w Mr. Ketan Joshi, 'B' Panel and Mr. M. M. Pable, AGP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Girish Godbole, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Simon Mascarenhas i/by Mulla & Mullah and Cragie Blunt & Caroe, for Respondent No. 12.

...

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : 10th JUNE, 2026 P.C:- 1.

The Writ Petition filed by one Ram Dashrath Patil, a resident of the nearby locality, is aggrieved by the continuation of the activity by Respondent No. 12- Indian

2/3 25 WP.4670.2023.odt Oiltanking Limited, indulging in storage of Naphtha by securing the license under the Maharashtra Naphtha (Acquisition Storage, Sale and Prevention of use in Automobiles) Order, 2000. His grievance is that the license granted in favour of Respondent No. 12 was valid up to 30.08.2008, and Respondent No. 12 applied for its renewal on 27.02.2009, but the application was kept pending decision till 2019, but in the interregnum, Respondent No. 12 continued to handle and store Naphtha.

2.

Respondent No. 12 has filed a detailed affidavit through its Head Legal, and the affidavit categorically admit that Naphtha License No. 6/2001 issued by the office of Respondent No. 6 on 31.08.2001 was valid until 30.08.2002. However, it is categorically stated that Respondent No. 12 made applications for renewal of the license prior to its expiration and the same was granted, more particularly, in the year 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008. It is also stated that the last renewal in the form of License bearing No. 73/2007 granted in its favour on 30.08.2007. Thereafter, an application was made to the Additional Collector, Alibag, District- Raigad in Form No. V of Order 2000 alongwith the required requisite documents prior to its expiry, i.e. on 30.08.2008.

The reply affidavit is accompanied with the renewal of the license in form of License No.08/2024 granted on 03.04.2024, and the license is declared to be valid up to 31.08.2024. The details of the renewal of license prescribed in the order passed by the Collector refer to the date of renewal as 31.08.2024, and the validity date as per renewal, as 31.08.2026.

3/3 25 WP.4670.2023.odt 3.

From perusal of the said affidavit and on hearing learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Godbole, representing Respondent No. 12, learned Senior Counsel Mr. Shah do not dispute that, as on date, the license in favour of Respondent No. 12 is valid up to 31.08.2026.

4.

We quite appreciate the concern of the Petitioner regarding the hazards being faced, if an activity such as handling or storage of Naphtha is carried out without the requisite license, and it is the contention of Mr. Godbole that, in the wake of the requisite clause of the Maharashtra Naphtha (Acquisition, Sale, Storage and Prevention of Use in Automobile) Order, 2000, and Maharashtra Naphtha (Licensing) Order, 2009, the application for renewal of the license was never refused to Respondent No. 12, and that is why the activity continued.

In any case, we expect the Petitioner, if at all, being concerned to be diligent about the validity of the license, and as of today, Respondent No. 12 is armed with a license, which is valid up to August, 2026, we do not deem it appropriate to entertain the grievance of the Petitioner, and we dispose of the Writ Petition with liberty being conferred to him to take the appropriate course, if at all, a cause accrues to him in future. The Writ Petition is disposed off.

Pending Interim Application is also disposed off. (MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)