Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shivram S/O Soma Jambhulkar And ... vs State Of Maha. Thr. ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 5920 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 5920 Bom
Judgement Date : 14 August, 2017

Bombay High Court
Shivram S/O Soma Jambhulkar And ... vs State Of Maha. Thr. ... on 14 August, 2017
Bench: S.C. Gupte
                                                                                  1                                                                wp5173.17

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                 NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                                                       WRIT PETITION NO.5173/2017

1.         Shivram S/o Soma Jambhulkar,
           A/a. 55 Yrs., Occu. Agri.

2.         Bhumeshwar S/o Balchandra Gabhane,
           A/a. 50 Yrs., Occu. Agri. 

           Both R/o At & Post - Indora (Kurd) 
           Tah. Tirora, Distt. Gondia.                                                                                                                        ..Petitioners.

                          ..Vs..

1.         The State of Maharashtra,
           through the Minister / Secretary, 
           Department of Food, Civil Supply and 
           Consumer Protection Maharashtra State
           Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 

2.         The Deputy Commissioner (Supply)
           Nagpur Division, Nagpur.

3.         District Supply Officer,
           Gondia, Tah. and Distt. Gondia. 

4.         Shri Krishna Kumar S/o Tejlal Patle,
           A/a. Major, Occu. Fair Price Shop,
           R/o At and Post - Indora (Khurd), 
           Tah. Tirora, Distt. Gondia.                                                                                                             ..Respondents.
  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
           Shri V.R. Borkar, Advocate for the petitioners.
           Shri A.R. Chutke, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 
           Mrs. A.R. Taywade, Advocate for respondent No.4.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
                                                                 CORAM :  S.C. GUPTE, J.
                                                                 DATE  :     14.8.2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.                        Heard learned counsel for the parties.





                                          2                                                                wp5173.17

2. Rule. Taken up for hearing forthwith by consent of counsel.

3. The petition challenges a revisional order passed by the Hon'ble

Minister of Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection on 12 th July, 2017. By

the impugned order, the Hon'ble Minister appears to have passed a one line

direction to list the matter for hearing upon stay of the orders below. The

record of the case indicates that on the complaint of the petitioners, who are

villagers / ration card holders of village Indora (Khurd), an enquiry was held

into alleged corrupt practices of respondent No.4, who is the owner of fair price

shop in the village. The Tahsildar, Tirora and Supply Inspector, Tirora (Urban)

visited the shop and submitted a report to the District Supply Officer, Gondia.

The District Supply Officer thereupon by his letter dated 30 th December, 2016

directed the Tahsildar to make a detailed enquiry and submit his report. This

detailed enquiry was conducted and report was submitted by the Tahsildar on

5th January, 2017. In the meeting of Gramsabha, the villagers of Indora

(Khurd) passed a unanimous resolution that the authorization of respondent

No.4 should be cancelled. On the report of the Tahsildar, Tirora, the District

Supply Officer, by his order dated 30 th January, 2017 issued a show cause

notice to respondent No.4. An explanation was submitted by respondent No.4

in response to this notice. Upon enquiry, thereafter, the District Supply Officer

vide his letter dated 18th February, 2017 cancelled the authorization of the fair

price shop and forfeited the amount of deposit placed by respondent No.4. The

3 wp5173.17

District Supply Officer made temporary arrangements allowing the fair price

shop of an adjacent village to cater to the ration card holders of the village

Indora (Khurd). The respondent No.4, thereafter, preferred a revision

application before the Deputy Commissioner of Supply, Nagpur Division,

Nagpur. By his order 17th May, 2017, the Deputy Commissioner remanded the

matter to the District Supply Officer, Gondia for an enquiry with some

directions. The temporary arrangement ordered by the District Supply Officer,

however, was not disturbed. Aggrieved by this order of the Deputy

Commissioner, respondent No.4 appears to have preferred a revision before the

State of Maharashtra, through the Hon'ble Minister, Department of Food, Civil

Supply and Consumer Protection, in which the one line order, as indicated

above, was passed by the Hon'ble Minister.

4. It is apparent that in the face of the complaint of corrupt practices

by the villagers, including the petitioners, and the report submitted and

detailed enquiry carried out by the Tahsildar and thereafter by the District

Supply Officer and the matter being simply remanded by the first revisional

authority for a further enquiry with certain directions and with an alternate

arrangement for catering to the ration card holders of village Indora (Khurd)

being in place (at least since 18 th February, 2017), the Hon'ble Minister could

not have stayed the orders below without hearing the petitioners. In the

premises, the impugned order of stay passed by the Hon'ble Minister has

4 wp5173.17

caused failure of justice and needs to be corrected. Rule is accordingly made

absolute and the impugned order of 12th July, 2017 passed by respondent No.1

is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to respondent No.1 for a

fresh hearing in accordance with law. It is made clear that before passing any

interim order, including stay or otherwise, respondent No.1 shall cause a notice

to be issued to the petitioners herein and hear them on such interim application

and orders to be passed on the revision application of respondent No.4. Till the

Hon'ble Minister decides the matter, after hearing the parties, including the

petitioners herein, the alternate arrangements made vide District Supply

Officer's order dated 18th February, 2017 shall continue to operate.

Respondent No.1 shall hear the parties and take a decision on the interim order

to be passed within a period of six weeks from today.

5. All parties to act on a copy of this order duly authenticated by the

Sheristedar of the Court.

JUDGE

Tambaskar.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter