MUMBAI: Bombay high court has expressed displeasure at the manner in which in July 2019 the then minister of state (MoS) for revenue, Shiv Sena’s Sanjay Rathod, “without jurisdiction” reviewed and recalled a September 2014 order of his predecessor, Suresh Dhas, to refund three sand miners their lease deposits. This, despite the HC directing the state to pay them in 2017. Dhas was then with the NCP and is now with the BJP. Rathod is now with the Shinde-led Sena.
Justices Sunil Shukre and Manish Pitale on Wednesday gave their verdict on the state’s review petitions against the HC order. The miners’ lease ended while they were unable to work on the sand ghats to their fullest capacity due to intervening circumstances. On September 9, 2014, Dhas directed a refund of the lease deposits within three months. Since Dhas’s order was not implemented, the trio had moved HC. On November 28, 2017, the HC directed they be paid within three months. On July 2, 2019, Rathod reviewed and recalled Dhas’ order.
The state’s review pleas said Rathod’s order was subject to the HC’s decision in pending petitions. The judges said it is “strange” because there were no pending petitions. They agreed with advocate K N Shermale for original petitioner Ajay Pawar and Fulchand Khade that Rathod “had no jurisdiction” to review Dhas’s order after the HC passed it. They noted that the state filed a review in respect of Pawar and Khade, as the third, Santosh Minde, was paid even after Rathod’s order.
The judges said the state authorities should have realised the mistake and also paid Pawar and Khade. Instead, they were given “discriminatory treatment” and to “worsen the case it (the state) has or its officers have now made a brazen attempt to perpetuate inequality and arbitrariness” by filing review petitions.
“The state is ideally a quintessence of justice and a model litigant. But these two review petitions filed by the state, the decision about which must have been taken by some of its officers, have become an epitome of injustice. This court would be the last one to bear with injustice. The petitions, therefore, deserve to be dismissed,” the judges said.
They did not “straightway impose costs” after the state advocate Asif Patel pleaded for “pardon”. They directed the authorities to ignore Rathod’s order, implement Dhas’s and pay Pawar and Khade within three weeks, as per the 2017 HC order. Failing to do so, the state will pay 7% interest per annum from 2017 and also be liable to pay Rs 5 lakh each as costs to them, said HC, adding if paid, the costs may be recovered from concerned officers.
Justices Sunil Shukre and Manish Pitale on Wednesday gave their verdict on the state’s review petitions against the HC order. The miners’ lease ended while they were unable to work on the sand ghats to their fullest capacity due to intervening circumstances. On September 9, 2014, Dhas directed a refund of the lease deposits within three months. Since Dhas’s order was not implemented, the trio had moved HC. On November 28, 2017, the HC directed they be paid within three months. On July 2, 2019, Rathod reviewed and recalled Dhas’ order.
The state’s review pleas said Rathod’s order was subject to the HC’s decision in pending petitions. The judges said it is “strange” because there were no pending petitions. They agreed with advocate K N Shermale for original petitioner Ajay Pawar and Fulchand Khade that Rathod “had no jurisdiction” to review Dhas’s order after the HC passed it. They noted that the state filed a review in respect of Pawar and Khade, as the third, Santosh Minde, was paid even after Rathod’s order.
The judges said the state authorities should have realised the mistake and also paid Pawar and Khade. Instead, they were given “discriminatory treatment” and to “worsen the case it (the state) has or its officers have now made a brazen attempt to perpetuate inequality and arbitrariness” by filing review petitions.
“The state is ideally a quintessence of justice and a model litigant. But these two review petitions filed by the state, the decision about which must have been taken by some of its officers, have become an epitome of injustice. This court would be the last one to bear with injustice. The petitions, therefore, deserve to be dismissed,” the judges said.
They did not “straightway impose costs” after the state advocate Asif Patel pleaded for “pardon”. They directed the authorities to ignore Rathod’s order, implement Dhas’s and pay Pawar and Khade within three weeks, as per the 2017 HC order. Failing to do so, the state will pay 7% interest per annum from 2017 and also be liable to pay Rs 5 lakh each as costs to them, said HC, adding if paid, the costs may be recovered from concerned officers.
