wp698.08 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.698 OF 2008 1) Baburao s/o Namdeo Ragade, R/o-Ramdulwadi, Tq-Badhanapur, Dist-Jalna, and others. ...PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, in Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.J.M. Murkute Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader with S/Shri. V.D. Godbharle, R.P. Phatake, S.K. Kadam and V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleaders for Respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.736 OF 2008 1) Kavita Bhaskar Badhe, R/o-Kusli, Tq-Jafrabad, Dist-Jalna, and others. ...PETITIONERS. wp698.08 2 VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, in Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.V.D. Patnoorkar Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader with S/Shri. V.D. Godbharle, R.P. Phatake, S.K. Kadam and V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleaders for Respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.737 OF 2008 1) Govindrao Bajirao Pandit, R/o-Delegaon, Tq-Jafrabad, Dist-Jalna, and others. ...PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others. ...RESPONDENTS. wp698.08 3 ... Shri.V.D. Patnoorkar Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader with S/Shri. V.D. Godbharle, R.P. Phatake, S.K. Kadam and V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleaders for Respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.891 OF 2008 Partur Taluka Swastha Dhanya Dukandaar Sangh, Through its Partur Taluka Vice-President, Shri. Ankush Ambadasrao Lipne, R/o-Shelgaon, Tq-Partur, Dist-Jalna. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary in Food and Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai, and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.M.P. Kale Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader with S/Shri. V.D. Godbharle, R.P. Phatake, S.K. Kadam and V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleaders for Respondents. ... wp698.08 4 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1252 OF 2008 Bhagwan s/o Limbaji Borade, R/o-Patoda (Bk.), Tq-Mantha, Dist-Jalna. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, in Food and Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai, and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.M.P. Kale Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader with S/Shri. V.D. Godbharle, R.P. Phatake, S.K. Kadam and V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleaders for Respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1799 OF 2008 1) Keshavrao s/o Govindrao Girnare, R/o-Kandali, Tq-Bhokardan, Dist-Jalna, and others. ...PETITIONERS. wp698.08 5 VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, in Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.J.M. Murkute Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader with S/Shri. V.D. Godbharle, R.P. Phatake, S.K. Kadam and V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleaders for Respondents. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. ORDER RESERVED ON : 14TH DECEMBER, 2010. ORDER PRONONUCED ON: 21ST DECEMBER, 2010. ORDER [PER NARESH H. PATIL, J.] : 1. In these Petitions, identical issues are raised by the Petitioners; therefore, the Petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common Order. wp698.08 6 2. In short, the contention of the Petitioners is that they were running licensed fair price shops since last so many years and were permitted to distribute kerosene also. The Petitioners have challenged the Government Resolution dated 3rd November, 2007 and consequent steps taken by respective District Supply Officers. 3. Under the Government Resolution dated 3rd November 2007, the State Government decided to invite applications from self help groups without disturbing the existing fair price shops and retail license holders. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respective Petitioners urged before this Court that under the earlier policy, they were permitted to distribute kerosene through their fair price shops, but in view of the issuance of the Government Resolution dated 3rd November 2007, in wp698.08 7 case self help group is granted license to distribute kerosene, then their supply of kerosene could be stopped or their quota could also be drastically reduced. The Petitioners have no grievance if the State goes ahead with the policy as stipulated under the said Resolution, by continuing the old policy as such. As the Petitioners are dealing in distribution of kerosene since last more than fifteen years, it would not be proper and reasonable for the State Government to change that policy and invite applications from self help groups. 5. Shri. Khandare, learned Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents submitted that All Maharashtra Fair Price Shop Keepers and Kerosene Dealers Federation and one another had filed Writ Petition No.303 of 2008 before the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court on 14th January, 2008. The Petitioners therein had prayed to quash and set aside the Government Resolution dated 3rd wp698.08 8 November, 2007 by declaring it ultra virus to the provisions of the Constitution of India, the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and various Orders framed under it by the Central and State Government. The said Writ Petition came to be disposed of by Judgment and Order dated 15th June, 2009 by the Division Bench of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court (CORAM: D.D. SINHA AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ.). In the concluding Para No.16, in the Judgment, the Division Bench observed thus: "16. In view of the above- referred facts and circumstances, it is evident that serious and marathon exercise is undertaken by the Apex Court for the purposes of streamlining all the facets of Public Distribution System in this country for making it more effective and efficient. All the State Governments including the State of Maharashtra are party to the said petition. Though the wp698.08 9 second report appears to be submitted by the Central Vigilance Commission headed by Justice Wadhwa (retired), this Court is not aware whether the Apex Court has finally taken any decision thereon by issuing directions to the various States in this country. It is in such circumstances, we are of the view that it will be appropriate for the State Government to seek necessary clarification within a period of two months from today whether the procedure of issuance of fresh fair price shop licences as well as kerosene retail dealerships evolved by the State Government vide Government Resolution dated 3.11.2007 can be continued till such time the Apex Court takes appropriate decision. We expect the State Government not to issue any fresh fair price shop licence or kerosene retail dealership in the mean-time." wp698.08 10 6. The learned Government Pleader had further invited our attention to the order passed by the Apex Court in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India and others in I.A. No.90 in Writ Petition (C) No.196 of 2001. On 10th May, 2010, the Apex Court passed following Order: " We have heard learned counsel for the parties. As an interim measure, the State of Maharashtra is permitted to issue licences for Fair Price Shops and Kerosene retail shops to Self Help Groups. They may distribute it through Gram Panchayat, Co- operative Society, Women/Co- operative Society run by women, Ex-Army Co-operative Society, Handicapped, Widows and greater priority would be given to the wp698.08 11 Widows of Army men. Place this application on 21st July, 2010." 7. Reliance was also placed on the Government Circular dated 18th March, 2010. The Government Pleader submitted that the Petitioners do not have vested legal right to continue to distribute kerosene in absence of license. Considering the convenience of the people at large, the State Government at the relevant time had permitted some of the fair price shop owners to distribute kerosene, so as to cater to the rural masses. But State Government has decided now to adopt a new policy, which is reflected in the Government Resolution dated 3rd November, 2007. Reliance was also placed on an Order dated 1st September 2010, passed by the Division Bench of this Court (CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH AND K.U. CHANDIWAL, JJ.) in Writ Petition No.907 of 2008 (Damodhar s/o Ramkrishna More and others vs. The wp698.08 12 State of Maharashtra and others). 8. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submit that the issue raised in Writ Petition No. 303 of 2008 before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court was different than the issue which is being raised now in this Court by way of present Petitions. It is also submitted that some of the Petitions raising identical issues were already admitted. 9. We have considered the relevant record placed before us, the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the copy of memo of Writ Petition No.303 of 2008 filed before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, the orders passed by the Division Bench of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court and the Order passed by the Apex Court, the relevant Government Resolutions and circulars. wp698.08 13 10. Considering the seriousness of the issue being dealt with in a public interest litigation in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India and others, pending before the Apex Court, we listed these Petitions for admission hearing as these Petitions were pending since last 2 to 3 years at admission stage. 11. The Petitioners admittedly do not have licenses to distribute kerosene. For the convenience of the rural masses, the State Government permitted distribution of kerosene through fair price shops, at the relevant time. It is true that the Petitioners have been running fair price shops and distributing kerosene since last more than fifteen years. The question is, whether the Petitioners could claim any legal or vested right to continue in distribution of kerosene on the basis of executive directions issued at the relevant time; more so, in view of the fact that the State Government now has decided wp698.08 14 to adopt a new policy and appoint licensed kerosene dealers from self help groups including women's self help groups with a particular object behind the said policy. 12. In the facts of the case, we are of the view that the State Government is entitled to adopt reasonable policy in respect of distribution of kerosene. The State Government had clarified in their impugned Government Resolution dated 3rd November, 2007 that the policy would be implemented by maintaining earlier fair price shop holders and licensed retailers. The interpretation put up by the Petitioners is that the licensed retailers includes persons like the Petitioners who are distributing kerosene through their fair price shops, though in the absence of any specific license granted by the concerned authorities. We are not convinced with the submissions on that count. All Maharashtra Fair Price Shop Keepers and Kerosene Dealers Federation had already agitated wp698.08 15 the issue in respect of the Government Resolution dated 3rd November, 2007. The said Resolution had fallen for consideration of the Division Bench of Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. The Division Bench had disposed of the said Petition in the light of pendency of Public Interest Litigation in the Apex Court for the purposes of streamlining all the facets of Public Distribution System in this Country for making it more effective and efficient. 13. The State Government filed an application in the Supreme Court in the matter of P.I.L. i.e. in the case of People's Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India and others, after disposal of the Writ Petition by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. By an order dated 10th May, 2010, the Apex Court as an interim measure, permitted the State of Maharashtra to issue license for fair price shops and kerosene retail shops to self help group, Gram Panchayat, Co- wp698.08 16 operative Society, Women/Co-operative Society run by women, Ex-Army Co-operative Society, Handicapped, Widows by giving greater priority to the widows of Army men. 14. The State urges that they be permitted to implement the order passed by the Apex Court in its letter and spirit, so that the distribution of essential commodities is done in more appropriate manner by involving various sections of society, by extending helping hand to the rural population. We find that there is laudable object behind the policy framed by the State Government which is reflected through the Government Resolution dated 3rd November, 2007. 15. In the light of the facts of the case, the pendency of Public Interest Litigation before the Apex Court and the Order passed by the Apex Court, we are not inclined to entertain these Petitions. The Writ Petitions are dismissed. wp698.08 17 16. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners prayed for maintaining status quo in respect of distribution of kerosene for a period of three months from today. We direct the State Government and its Authorities to maintain status quo in respect of distribution of kerosene through the fair price shops run by the Petitioners, for a period of three months from today. [SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/DEC10/wp698.08