Bombay High Court
Prakash Sadshivrao Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 27 August, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:19675
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4412 OF 2017
PRAKASH SADSHIVRAO JADHAV
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Mr. S. G. Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. V. S. Badakh, AGP for the respondent/State
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 27th AUGUST, 2024
P.C. :-
1. Heard Mr. Jadhavar, learned advocate appearing for the
petitioner.
2. The petitioner impugns the order passed by the Hon'ble
Minister Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department
Mantralaya Mumbai in Revision No. VAM-1010/P.K.531-10/Civil Supply 21
dated 05/05/2012.
3. Mr. Jadhavar, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner was license holder of fair price shop. His
authorization was canceled without following due process of law. He
assailed the order of cancellation of his license before the Deputy
Commissioner, Aurangabad, however, his revision application was
dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Hon'ble Minister in
942.wp4412.17.odt 1 of 4
Revision Application No. VAM-1010/P.K.531-10/Civil Supply 21. He was
noticed to remain present for hearing on 21/12/2010. Accordingly
arguments were advance before the Hon'ble Minister. However, the final
order dated 05/05/2012 has been passed after more than 17 months. He
would submit that the Hon'ble Minister ought to have passed the order
within a period of 60 days from the date of hearing. The order passed
after the period of 17 days from the date of hearing cannot be sustained
in law. In support of his submission he relies upon order passed by this
Court in Writ Petition No. 1297/2013 for case of Devidas s/o Kisan
Gholve Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, wherein this Court observed
in paragraph no.6 which reads thus:
"6. It is trite that the judgment normally has to be
pronounced expeditiously after hearing and preferably within
sixty days. In the present matter, the order is passed after one
and half year. On this count itself, I am setting aside the
impugned order."
4. Mr. Jadhavar, learned advocate would, therefore, urge that
the matter may be remitted back to the Hon'ble Minister for taking
decision afresh after granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
5. Learned AGP opposes the prayer. He would submit that
authorities have concurrently held that the applicant was guilty of
misconduct while running the fair price shop. Consequently, the action is
being taken against him. He would submit that if the merits of the
942.wp4412.17.odt 2 of 4
matter are considered, the petitioner has no case and no prejudice is
cause to him.
6. Having considered submissions advanced it is apparent that
the Hon'ble Minister had heard parties on 21/12/2010 and closed
Revision for orders. However, the final judgment and order is passed on
05/05/2012 i.e. after 17 months. The record also indicates that even
after passing such order the petitioner was noticed by Tahasildar that
hearing of his Revision is scheduled on 06/03/2013 before the Hon'ble
Minister. The circumstances on record creates doubts as regards the
actual date of the order passed by the Hon'ble Minister. Mr. Jadhavar,
learned advocate is right in contending that it was obligatory on the part
Hon'ble Minister to pass the order within a period of sixty days once the
hearing of Revision was concluded. In the present case, the timeline is
not observed. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained in law
and liable to be quashed and set aside. Hence, following order.
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 05/05/2012 in Revision
Application No. VAM-1010/P.K.531-10/Civil Supply 21 is quashed
and set aside.
(iii) The matter is relegated back to the Hon'ble Minister who
942.wp4412.17.odt 3 of 4
shall decide revision application within a period of six (06) months
from the date of this order after granting opportunity of hearing to
the petitioner and all concerned.
(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Hon'ble Minister on
09/09/2024 and put up his submission.
(v) The Hon'ble Minister may hear the parties on same day or
schedule date for further hearing as per convenience.
(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)
ssp
942.wp4412.17.odt 4 of 4
