1 W.P. 3800/11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3800/2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8682/2011 POPAT NARSINHA DEOKATE VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 28th July, 2011. Mrs. M.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.G. Shelke, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 1. Heard. 2. The chequered history of the events that took place prior to this writ petition which was filed on 24th May, 2011, is as follows. On 31/03/2011 the petitioner’s Fair price shop was cancelled and simultaneously on the same day, the District Supply Officer, Osmanabad issued proclamation for inviting applications for grant of licence to run the Fair price shop. The petitioner filed a revision and obtained a stay to the effect of the proclamation on 11/04/2011. Despite of the order issued by Dy. Commissioner in the revision, it seems, 2 W.P. 3800/11 the District Supply Officer, Osmanabad once again issued similar proclamation on 13/05/2011 against which the writ petition was filed on 24/05/2011. However, the petitioner could not get interim protection till 12/07/2011. On 25/05/2011, the revision petition filed by the petitioner before Dy. Commissioner was dismissed. But in the mean time, on 08/07/2011, the District Supply Officer passed an order in favour of a party giving licence to run the shop. In view of this, purpose of filing writ petition is practically over. The petitioner is trying to suggest that the order dated 08/07/2011 is actually passed on 12/07/2011 But I am not inclined to go into such factual controversy in this writ petition. The petition stands dismissed as infructuous. 3. In view of dismissal of writ petition, Civil application stands disposed of. [A.V. NIRGUDE,J.] ts k/2011/July28/wp3800.11