1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 192 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7138 OF 2009 Dinu s/o. Jagatsing Pawar .. petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondent. --- Mr. A.V. Joshi, Advocate for the appellant Mr. A.B. Girase, Advocate for respondent No.5 Mr. R.P. Phatke, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & R.M. BORDE,JJ. DATE : 13TH JANUARY, 2011. ORAL ORDER :- 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this LPA, the appellant has challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge, dated 24.11.2009, in Writ Petition No.7138/2009, by which the writ petition filed by the appellant has been rejected. The order passed by the learned single Judge, dated 24.11.2009, reads thus :- 2 "The petitioner challenges the concurrent orders passed by the District Supply Officer, Nandurbar, Dy. Commissioner, Nashik and the Hon'ble Minister, thereby rejecting an application filed by the petitioner. 2. It has been found that the licence which was granted to the petitioner, was granted on temporary basis since respondent no.5 was facing criminal prosecution. It was specific condition in the licence granted to the petitioner that in the event the respondent No.5 is acquitted in the criminal proceedings, the licence shall stand restored back to the respondent no.5. 3. In that view of the matter, it can not be said that the petitioner had any vested right in the licence. No perversity is noticed in the orders passed by the competent authority. Hence, rejected.” 2]. From bare perusal of the order we are satisfied that it deserves no interference by this court in the LPA. Hence, the LPA is dismissed. [R.M. BORDE,J.] [D.B. BHOSALE.] Grt/-