1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6720 OF 2009 M/s.Jaishankar Oil Depot, Through its Partner, Shri.Anandrao S/o.Daulatraorao Patil, Age- years, Occu-Business, R/o.Khondamali, Tq. and Dist. Nandurbar PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Food Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, 2. The Collector, Nandurbar, District Nandurbar 3. The District Supply Officer/ Additional Collector, Nandurbar, District Nandurbar, RESPONDENTS Mr.D.S.Bagul, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.V.H.Dighe, learned AGP for the respondents. (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 08/10/2009 2 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. We have heard Shri.Bagul, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri.Dighe, learned AGP who accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1 to 3. 3. By this petition under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of writ of mandamus directing respondent no.2 to decide the application submitted by the petitioner dated 14/11/2008 for issuance of a new storage license. In the light of the relief prayed for by the petitioner in this petition, we deem it appropriate to decide this petition finally at this stage. It is not necessary for us to advert to the facts of the present case in the light of the limited relief which the petitioner has sought. 4. In that light of the matter therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition and direct the respondents to decide the aforesaid application. Accordingly this writ petition succeeds and the respondents are directed to decide the application of the petitioner dated 14/11/2008, if pending, in accordance with Law, within a period of 3 months from today and to communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. In the circumstances there will be no order 3 as to costs. 5. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/OCT 2009/wp6720-09