Bombay High Court
Ambika Hamal Kamgar Sahakari ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 14 August, 2017
Bench: R.M. Borde
(1) wp10183.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 10183 OF 2017
Ambika Hamal Kamgar Sahakari Sanstha .. Petitioner
Maryadit, Shevgaon,
Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar,
Through its Chairman,
Pradip s/o. Nanasaheb Kale,
Age. 30 years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Wadule (Bk), Tq. Shevgaon,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents
Through its Secretary,
Food, Civil Supply and Consumer
Protection Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32.
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Supply),
Nashik Division, Nashik.
3. The District Collector,
Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar.
4. The Tahsildar
Tahsil Office Rahuri,
Tq. Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar.
5. Hamal Mathadi Kamgar Seva
Sanstha Maryadit, Rahuri,
Through its Chairman,
Gangadhar s/o. Chimaji Sangle,
Age. 55 years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Sangle Vasti, Tanpurewadi,
Rahuri, Tq. Rahuri,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
::: Uploaded on - 14/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/08/2017 02:41:34 :::
(2) wp10183.17
Mr.B.G. Sagade, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent/State.
Mr.Rahul B. Tenak, Advocate for respondent No.5.
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED : 14.08.2017
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER : R.M. BORDE,J.] :-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard
finally with the consent of the parties.
2. The petitioner-society was allotted the work in
respect of loading and unloading of the food grains at
Government Godown, Rahuri, after cancellation of the
contract issued in favour of respondent No.5-Society by
order dated 11.04.2017, passed by the Collector,
Ahmednagar. The adverse order passed by the Collector on
11.04.2017 was a matter of challenge before the Dy.
Commissioner (Supply) Nashik Division, Nashik, in
Arbitration Application No.01 of 2017. In the appeal
presented before respondent No.2-Dy. Commissioner, the
petitioner herein was not made party. The Dy.
(3) wp10183.17
Commissioner proceeded to allow the appeal and directed
to quash the order issued by the Collector allotting the
contract for remaining period in favour of the petitioner
and it has been directed to restore the contract, which
was allotted initially in favour of respondent No.5. It
is noticed that though the order adverse to the interest
of the petitioner has been passed by the Dy.
Commissioner, the petitioner was not impleaded as a party
to the Arbitration Application, nor was heard by the
deciding authority before passing the adverse order.
Since the order passed by the Dy. Commissioner (Supply),
Nashik Division, Nashik is issued in violation of the
principles of natural justice, same deserves to be set
aside. Respondent No.5 undertakes to implead the
petitioner as a party respondent in the Arbitration
Application presented before the Dy. Commissioner.
3. The writ petition is allowed. The order impugned
in this petition dated 24.07.2017 passed by the Dy.
Commissioner (Supply), Nashik Division, Nashik is quashed
(4) wp10183.17
and set aside and the matter stands remitted back to the
same authority for taking decision in accordance with
law. The petitioner as well as respondent No.5 assure to
appear before the deciding authority on 21.08.2017. The
Dy. Commissioner (Supply), Nashik Division, Nashik, shall
decide the appeal on its own merit and after extending an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner herein as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of
15 days from the date of appearance of the parties before
him.
4. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be
no order as to costs.
[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [R.M.BORDE,J.]
snk/2017/AUG17/wp10183.17
