1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.159 OF 1998 Sau.Vijaya Ramesh Joshi, age: major, Occ: Business, R/o Bhimnagar, Yeshwant Nagar, Sakri Road, Dhule. Petitioner Versus 1 State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2 The Honourable Minister Government of Maharashtra, Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 3 Additional Commissioner, Commissionerate, Nasik Division, Nasik. 4 The Tahsildar, Dhule. Respondents Mr.A.B.Girase, advocate holding for Mr.R.B.Raghuwanshi, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.D.Rakh, A.G.P. for Respondents CORAM: B.R.GAVAI AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 2 nd July, 2010. 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala, J.): 1 By the present writ petition, petitioner assails order dated 02.04.1997, passed by Honourable Minister for Food and Civil Supplies, by virtue of which, order dated 01.07.1996, passed by appellate authority i.e. Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik, was set aside by exercising suo motu powers. 2 The Tahsildar has suspended license of the petitioner on account of the fact that there was discrepancy in the quantity of kerosene stock with the petitioner. Petitioner had preferred an appeal before Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik, which came to be allowed. Against that order, Honourable Minister for Food & Civil Supplies, invoked suo motu powers and set aside order passed by Additional Commissioner and restored the order passed by Tahsildar suspending license of the petitioner. 3 This Court, while admitting the petition, granted interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (d) and (e), on 12.01.1998. 4 This Court, in Writ Petitions No.2549 of 1997 and 2550 of 1997, has held that in order to exercise power of review or revision, there must be an error apparent on the face of record of the case. 5 On perusal of the order passed by Additional Commissioner, there does not appear any such error apparent on the face of record. In view of the same, we allow the present writ petition and relegate the petitioner to District Supply Officer, Dhule for further proceedings, as per the judgment of Additional Commissioner. 3 6 Interim relief granted by this Court on 12.01.1998 would continue till disposal of proceedings before District Supply Officer, Dhule and if the order of District Supply Officer, Dhule is adverse to the interest of petitioner, then interim relief would continue for a further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of communication of such order by the petitioner. 7 Rule is made absolute on above terms. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA) (B.R.GAVAI) JUDGE JUDGE ******* adb/wp15998