IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE Writ Petition No. 2832 of 2006 Shri Chandrakant Baburao Bandgar ..Petitioner vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Shri P.A.Pol for petitioner. Shri R.M.Patne, A.G.P. for respondent State. CORAM: S.B.MHASE J. CORAM: S.B.MHASE J. CORAM: S.B.MHASE J. 27th April, 2006 27th April, 2006 27th April, 2006 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard both the learned Counsel. 2. Perused the order passed by this Court on 31st January, 2006 in Writ Petition No.100 of 2006 which was filed by one G.D.Nalavade challenging the same order which has been challenged in the present petition. Since the person to whom the shop was allotted is dead and his wife is claiming the said shop this Court has directed to consider the claim of the wife along with one Shri Nalavade. 3. The present petitioner is also claiming the said shop. Therefore, it will be appropriate to consider the claim of the petitioner along with the claim of the petitioner in writ Petition no.100 of 2006 i.e. Shri Gajanan D.Nalawade. Under these circumstances, it is directed that the Controller of Rationing, respondent no.3, shall consider the claim of the wife of the deceased so also the petitioner in writ petition no.100 of 2006 and the present petitioner in accordance with law and applying the priority list provided by the Government. This exercise should be done after giving opportunity of hearing to the respective parties and decision will be taken within a period of 8 weeks from today. 4. Shri S.D.Shirsat, Desk Officer from Mantralaya is present. It is found that inspite of the directions given in the earlier petition the matter has not been disposed of. Let the facts as it is. Mantralaya officers shall take note of it and to see that the Controller decides the matter in accordance with law and as per the directions of this Court within the stipulated time. 4. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. (S.B.MHASE J.) (S.B.MHASE J.) (S.B.MHASE J.)