1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4446/2009 Jitesh B. Sahu VERSUS State of Maharashtra and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 30 , 2009 . Shri Fulzele, learned AGP seeks time of two weeks stating that he is still awaiting instructions. Request is opposed by Advocate Shri Vaishnav, for petitioner. He points out that on 16th November, 2009, this Court has already given last chance. The matter is to be disposed of finally as per the notice issued by this Court. The license of Eating House and Lodge of present petitioner has been suspended and its renewal has been rejected because of registration of offence vide Crime No. 3226/06 under Section 3 r/w 7 of Essential Commodities Act, on 18/10/2006. Advocate Vaishnav states that the action is taken after about 3 years of registration of offence and no other circumstances necessitating such suspension 2 or rejection of renewal is pointed out. Learned AGP states that because of registration of offence, as the offences are of serious nature, the action has been taken and as the action is in public interest, the same deserves to be maintained. The registration of offence on 18/10/2006 is the only reason given in the impugned order dated 10th August, 2009. It is apparent that registration of offence under Essential Commodities Act allegedly committed about 3 years back cannot be the valid and relevant reason for exercise of such powers. The action could have been held to be justified if it was taken within close proximity of the registration of the said offence. Because of expiry of period of about 3 years, the connection, if any, between the said offence and the impugned action is snapped. The impugned order dated 10th August, 2009, is, therefore, quashed and set aside. The learned AGP has stated that if apart from such material, the respondent have any material in their custody, they should be permitted to take action in accordance with law. No such material is pointed out to this Court by respondent till today. However, if there is any such material available in their custody and if law permits, the respondents are free to take action in accordance 3 with law. The petitioner is at liberty approach this Court against any action in this matter. Writ petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE Rvjalit