1. Heard Mr. Kurle, learned Advocate for Applicant in Interim Application; Mr. Samdani, learned Senior Advocate for Respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(c) and Mr. Bhatt, learned Advocate for Respondent No.2.

2. Interim Application is filed by Applicant – Original Petitioner No.2 for recusal from hearing the above captioned Writ Petitions by this Court. All three Writ Petitions are filed in the year 2016 and they were admitted on 10.04.2024 by this Court (Coram: Amit Borkar, J.). Writ Petitions arise out of proceedings initiated under Sections 70B, 43 and 32G of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short ‘the said Act’).

3. According to Applicant since the Writ Petitions are admitted they ought to be heard only in the ordinary course of business. Applicant is aggrieved because in April and May 2025 the Writ Petitions were listed before my predecessor Court (Coram: Sandeep V. Marne, J.) when the assignment was with that Court on 07.03.2025 and 02.05.2025. On 09.05.2025 that Court passed the following order and posted the matters for hearing to 20.06.2025.

“1) The Petitions were specifically fixed today for final hearing in view of urgency made out by the contesting Respondents. However, when the Petitions are called out for final hearing, it is brought to the notice of the Court that the Advocate on record, who used to represent Petitioners has returned the brief and arrangements are being made for engagement of a new advocate. It was made clear to the advocate for the Petitioners on 2 May 2025 that the Petitions would be taken up for final hearing on 9 May 2025 without entertaining a request for adjournment. In that view of the matter, change of advocate at this juncture is something, which this Court would ordinarily not approve. However, by way of indulgence and last chance, final hearing of the Petitions is deferred till 20 June 2025.

2) Interim relief granted earlier shall continue only till the next date of hearing.”

4. Petitions were adjourned to 20.06.2025 for final hearing. On 20.06.2025, Petitions did not reach hearing, therefore Advocate for Respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(c) moved this Court by praecipe dated 03.07.2025 stating that one contesting Respondent is 87 years old and pointed out order dated 09.05.2025 and therefore sought listing of Petitions before this Bench. Accordingly adhering to the request made and in view of the order dated 09.05.2025, the Petitions were listed on 07.07.2025.

5. When Petitions reached hearing on 07.07.2025, learned Advocate for Petitioners refused to argue and persuaded the Court to adjourn the matters to another date on the ground that Respondents’ Advocate moved the praecipe dated 03.07.2025 behind its back and the Court listed the matters on 07.07.2025 without their knowledge and consent. Due to this reason and looking into the previous order and on finding that Advocate for Petitioners was unwilling to answer any of the questions asked by the Court, which find mention in the order, the Petitions were adjourned to 21.07.2025 to enable the Advocate for Petitioners to get ready in the matters and argue on the adjourned date. On 21.07.2025, Advocate for Petitioners did not appear. However Petitioner No.2 appeared in-person alongwith his father and informed the Court their Advocate has refused to appear on their behalf and informed the Court that on 17.07.2025, Petitioner No.2 has filed a complaint before the Chief Justice of this Court and Chief Justice of India to initiate criminal prosecution against this Court and the previous Court (Coram: Sandeep V. Marne) on various grounds which are serious; viz, bribery and corruption. Hence Petitioner No.2 persuaded the Court to not hear the matters and adjourn them. After hearing Petitioner No.2, on 21.07.2025, following order was passed and the matters were adjourned to 04.08.2025 for hearing:-

“1. Heard Petitioner No.2 in-person; Mr. Samdani, learned Senior Advocate for Respondent s.1(a) to 1(c) and Mr. Bhatt, learned Advocate f