1 wp10130.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10130 OF 2010 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mrs. M. A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.B. Patil, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 3. 1. Heard Advocate Mrs. M.A. Kulkarni for petitioner and the learned A.G.P. Mr. N.B. Patil for respondent nos. 1 to 3. 2. Advocate Mrs. Kulkarni contends that suspension of authorisation of fair price shop is not envisaged in any regulation framed under the Essential Commodities Act. She, therefore, states that there has to be proper enquiry and after hearing the petitioner, necessary decision in this respect has to be taken. 3. Learned A.G.P. points out that prima facie, authority has found, wheat meant for petitioner's fair price shop stored with some other person and because of the same, the criminal prosecution is also lodged against the 2 wp10130.10 petitioner. The suspension is therefore only to await the adjudication in that criminal prosecution. The suspension according to him is pending said prosecution. 4. It is obvious that the respondents have yet not decided to permanently cancel the authorisation of fair price shop in favour of the petitioner. They are awaiting adjudication of criminal prosecution and hence suspension has been ordered as interim measure. I am therefore not inclined to interfere in the Petition at this stage. The petitioner is free to take further appropriate steps in the matter as per law. Writ Petition is rejected. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 21.01.2011 gas/wp10130.10