1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 338 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2824 OF 1998 (DECIDED) (Gitabai Sukhlal Jaiswal .v. The Collector, Chandrapur) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri A.S. Manohar, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 21ST JULY, 2010. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant. In this Letters Patent Appeal, the appellant has impugned the judgment and order dated 24.06.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the petition filed by the appellant whereby he had challenged the order/direction issued by the Collector, Chandrapur dated 21.07.1994 and confirmed by the Commissioner of State Excise, Maharashtra State, Mumbai, dated 10.11.1994. By these orders, issued by the Collector and the Commissioner, the appellant's Country Liquor License, for village Bhisi, Taluka Chimur, District Chandrapur, was cancelled/ terminated. The license was cancelled/terminated on the basis of the resolutions passed by the Gram Panchayat/Gram Sabha so also by Savitribai Phule Mahila Mandal having its registration no. 246/1992 (Chandrapur). This Mahila Mandal had applied to the Collector, making grievance that due to consumption of country liquor the family life of the villagers has become miserable, they are put to financial losses, the addicts humiliate the villagers, there is always law and order exigencies creating tension in the village. They urged to cancel the license and save villagers from widespread 2 menace in the village. In view of the resolutions and relying upon the government communication dated 14.07.1993 and circular dated 11.10.1993, the Collector has cancelled the license of the appellant. Shri A.S. Manohar, learned Counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that the resolutions passed by the Gram Panchayat are not genuine resolutions and they were not passed by following the due procedure. In short, he submitted that the resolutions passed by the Village Panchayat and Gram Panchayat are not as per the procedure. He further submitted that even if it is assumed that the meeting of the Gram Panchayat was convened and the resolution was passed by following due procedure, still the resolution could not have been relied upon by the concerned authority, since they were not unanimous resolutions as contemplated by the government communication dated 14.07.1993. We have perused the order passed by the Commissioner dated 10th November, 1994. In paragraph 3 thereof, he has recorded that the Gram Panchayat of the village passed a unanimous resolution on 25.03.1994 seeking closure of the C.L. III shop of the appellant in the village, as the same was creating nuisance to the villagers. It is further observed in the order that the Gram Sabha also passed a resolution on 17.05.1994 requesting closure of the C.L. III shop. That apart, even the Women's Organization also passed unanimous resolution making similar request. Learned Single Judge has considered all these facts in the impugned judgment in detail and in proper perspective. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. It is clear from the findings of facts recorded by the authorities below and affirmed by the learned Single Judge in 3 the writ petition that the action was necessitated due to the resolution passed by Savitribai Phule Mahila Mandal, a registered association so also on the basis of the resolutions passed by the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat. The clauses in the Government Communication dated 14.07.1993 clearly spell out that the resolution should be either by the Gram Sabha or by any registered women organization. There is no dispute that the resolution passed by the women organization was unanimous resolutions. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in the contentions urged by learned Counsel for the appellant. Learned Counsel for the appellant then relied upon the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 29.03.2010 in Writ Petition No. 1015 of 1998 to contend that since the shop of the petitioner has been functioning by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court since last about 10-12 years, without any complaint, there is no reason why his license should be cancelled. We have perused the said judgment and more particularly paragraph 9 thereof. Learned Single Judge has observed that the shop was functioning for 12 years and during this period of 12 years, no untoward incident or no complaint of any nature was pressed into service by the respondents. We find it difficult to agree with the view expressed by the learned Single Judge for allowing the petitioner in that writ petition to run his shop and that too only because no untoward incident or no complaint of any nature was pressed into service by the respondents. It is pertinent to note that in that petition so also in the present petition, the Gram Panchayat, Gram Sabha and the Women's Organization were not party and it would not be proper to expect that the State Government or the Commissioner or the Collector who are 4 party-respondents in the petition to bring any untoward incident or complaint of any nature before the Court. As a matter of fact, in such petitions, the complainants, such as Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat and/or Women Organization, are necessary parties and they alone can bring such material before the Court. In our opinion, merely because no such material is placed before Court at the statge of final hearing of the petition, cannot be a ground to allow the petition to run C.L. III shop in the village. The very objective of taking action against such shop on the complaints of the villagers and women organizations would frustrate, if the shop is allowed to run, merely on the ground that during pendency of the petition no untoward incident is brought on record. The petitioner cannot be allowed to take advantage of the ad- interim order to perpetuate wrong. In the circumstances, we find no merit in this contention also. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.