- (1.) THE petitioner seeks an order of quashing a notice dated September 19th, 1990 issued by the Sub-Divisional. Magistrate, Hingoli in the circumstances as herein below stated. By the notice dated January 13th, 1990, the petitioner was called upon to show cause why he should not be externed from as many as nine districts such as Nanded, Parbhani, Akola, Jalna, Aurangabad, Beed, Latur, Osmanabad, Yavatmal. The petitioner then showed cause by filing his reply on January 22nd, 1990. It appears that thereafter further show cause notice dated April 11th, 1990 was issued and the petitioner has also replied thereto but the externing authority has, on June 30th 1990, passed the order externing the petitioner from three districts namely Nanded, Parbhani and Aurangabad for a period of two years. The petitioner has challenged the said order of externment in appeal under section 60 of the Bombay Police Act and by order dated August 22nd, 1990, the respondent No. 1 namely the State of Maharashtra was pleased to allow the appeal and set aside the order of externment passed against the petitioner. To the surprise of the petitioner, he received the impugned notice dated September 19th, 1990 from the respondent No. 1 i. e. the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hingoli, District - Parbhani intimating him that as informed by the Government of Maharashtra, vide their order bearing No. EXT-1290-184/ Sic-5, dated August 22nd, 1990, the order of externment against the petitioner was revoked on account of some legal fault but having regard to the serious offences registered against the petitioner, in the opinion of the respondent No. 2, a fresh order of externment becomes necessary and, therefore the petitioner was asked to show cause on October 8th 1990.
(2.) THE petitioner submits that the impugned notice is ex-facia illegal and no proceeding can be commenced on the strength of the said notice. Therefore, the petitioner seeks an order to quash the said notice or the proceedings inititated under the said notice by the respondent No. 2,
(3.) SHRI Wagh, the learned A. P. P. , has fairly conceded that the impugned notice is not a notice under section 59 of the Bombay Police Act under which proceeding for externment can be initiated. Moreover it is agreed that the order of externment, which has been set aside in appeal, can not be reopened by the externing authority for one reason or the other by issuing such a notice. The apprehension of the petitioner that his interest is likely to be jeopardised by reason of the notice appears to be well founded in the circumstances of the case and, therefore, the impugned notice or any proceeding thereunder initiated by the respondent No. 2 must be quashed and set aside. The petition is accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute.;