IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.261 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7425 OF 2009 Suryakant Malkappa Banajgole ... Appellant Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. ...Respondents Mr. R.B. Bansode for the appellant. Mr. V.P. Malvankar, `A' Panel Counsel for State. CORAM : ANIL R. DAVE, C. J. & S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 30TH MARCH, 2010 P.C. The appellant was given a licence to sell Kerosene under a Public Distribution System and under the provisions of Essential Commodities Act. 2. It was reported to the authorities that there were several complaints against the appellant, one of the most important complaint was that he was selling kerosene at a higher rate than which was prescribed under the system. 3. In pursuance of the complaint, an enquiry was made and it was found that allegations were correct. Therefore, the licence given to the appellant had been cancelled. The appellant thereafter filed an appeal and thereafter even a revision but he failed in both. 4. In the circumstances, Writ Petition No.7425 of 2009 was filed by the appellant which has also been rejected and, therefore, this appeal has been filed. 5. We have heard the learned advocates and we have gone through the impugned order and other orders passed by the State authorities. 6. Upon perusal of the orders, it is clear that there was substance in the complaint made against the appellant and appellant himself has admitted the fact that he had sold kerosene at a higher price than the price which was fixed for sale of kerosene. 7. In our opinion, there was no violation of princile of natural justice. In the facts of the case, we do not find any substance in the appeal and the same is dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.