Bombay High Court

BHAGWAN GOWARDHAN KALHAPUREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARSHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The Court held that the S.D.O. must pass further orders on the show‑cause notice within three weeks after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

Summary

The petitioner, Bhagwan Gowardhan Kalhapure, filed a writ petition challenging a show‑cause notice issued by the Sub‑Divisional Officer (SDO) of Shrirampur, alleging that his JCB machine, seized on 19‑June‑2025, had not been released or adjudicated upon despite his filing a reply and producing documents. The petitioner contended that the SDO had failed to call him for a hearing or pass any further order, resulting in the continued possession of his vehicle by the authorities. The Court observed that the seizure was effected under a panchnama for alleged illegal excavation, not theft, and that procedural fairness required the SDO to decide the matter promptly after the petitioner’s reply. Consequently, the Court directed the SDO to grant the petitioner a hearing and pass a decision on the show‑cause notice within three weeks from the date of the order. The order was communicated to the respondent’s AGP for implementation.

Issues considered

What duty does the S.D.O. have to pass a decision on a show‑cause notice after the petitioner has filed a reply?
Whether the delay in adjudicating the seizure violates the petitioner's right to a fair and speedy administrative process.

Subjects

writ petition
show cause notice
seizure
administrative law
expeditious decision
property seizure
High Court of Bombay

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:10631


                                                    1                    wp 2495.26.odt

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 105 WRIT PETITION NO. 2495 OF 2026

                                    Bhagwan Gowardhan Kalhapure
                                                 VERSUS
                                  The State Of Maharshtra And Others
                                                     ...
                     Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. A.B. Kharosekar
                     AGP for Respondents: Mr. B.B.Bhise

                                         CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                         Dated       : March 09, 2026

                     PER COURT :-

                     1.    Present writ petition takes exception to the show cause

                     notice dated 20.6.2025 issued by the S.D.O. Shrirampur,

                     District Ahilyanagar.


                     2.    Limited grievance raised by petitioner is that, although

                     petitioner has filed reply to show cause notice and produced

                     relevant documents for consideration, however, no further

                     decision is taken in pursuance to the show cause notice. Even,

                     petitioner is not called for hearing till this date. His vehicle

                     JCB machine is in possession of the respondents authorities

                     since 19.6.2025.        He would therefore, urge that at-least

                     respondent no.3 be directed to take further decision.
                              2                          wp 2495.26.odt

3.    Considering submissions advanced, it can be observed

that petitioner is owner of the JCB machine, which has been

seized under panchnama dated 19.6.2025 alleging that it was

used for excavation of the earth material. Apparently, there is

no allegations about theft.       In this backdrop, petitioner is

served with show cause notice. It was expected that S.D.O.

takes expedite decision in the matter, particularly, when

petitioner has appeared and filed his reply.      In result, writ

petition stands disposed of with directions to respondent no.3

S.D.O., Shrirampur to pass further orders in pursuance to the

show cause notice within a period of three weeks from today

after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.


4.    Learned AGP to communicate this order to the

concerned authority.



                                  ( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. )
                                  …
AAA

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…