Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1148 (BOM)

Francisco Fonseca v. Commissioner

2012-06-29

F.M.REIS

body2012
Judgment : Heard Mrs. A. Agni, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Shri Shivan Dessai, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 and Shri S.D. Lotlikar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.2. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waive service. 3. The above petition challenges the order passed by the Administrative Tribunal at Panaji dated 15/06/2012 whereby the application filed by the petitioners praying for stay during the pendency of the appeal preferred by the petitioners challenging the order passed by the learned Deputy Collector at Panaji dated 29/02/2012 came to be rejected. 4. During the course of hearing of the above petition Shri S.D. Lotlikar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 as well as Shri Shivan Dessai, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 pointed out that in case the Tribunal is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously the status quo with regard to the survey records may be maintained until disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioners. 5. Mrs. Agni, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners points out that while deciding the stay application the learned Judge has arrived at findings on merits of the appeal. However, such findings, if any, cannot bind the Tribunal whilst deciding the appeal on merits as they are prima facie findings. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it appropriate that the above petition can be disposed of by directing the learned Tribunal to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioners expeditiously and without being influenced by any of the observations or findings in the impugned order. In the meanwhile, the parties shall maintain the status quo with regard to the entries in the survey records in respect of the disputed property. 7. In view of the above, I pass the following order: ORDER (i) The Tribunal is directed to decide the appeal no.12/2012 as expeditiously as possible and in any event on or before 31/12/2012. (ii) The Tribunal shall not be influenced in any manner with any of the observations or findings in the impugned order whilst deciding the above appeal on merits. (iii) The parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the entries in the survey records of the disputed property until the disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal. (ii) The Tribunal shall not be influenced in any manner with any of the observations or findings in the impugned order whilst deciding the above appeal on merits. (iii) The parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the entries in the survey records of the disputed property until the disposal of the appeal before the Tribunal. (iv) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. (v) Petition stands disposed of accordingly.