1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8442 OF 2009 Hasmukh Ramji Shah .. Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. Mrs.Poonam P.Bhosale for the petitioner. Ms.P.S.Cardozo A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE, J. DATED : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2 waives service. By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. By this writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 26.8.2009 passed by respondent no.2 by which the petitioner’s fair price shop licence has been cancelled. Mrs.Bhosale, learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that the impugned order deserves to be set aside solely on the ground that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of being heard by the concerned authority. She submits that the show cause notice dated 7.8.2009 was served 2 on the petitioner and he was called for hearing on 11.8.2009. He was given hardly four days time by the concerned authority. Respondent No.2 has filed reply affidavit stating that the petitioner did not remain present for hearing on 11.8.2009 and hence he proceeded to pass the impugned order. The order was passed on 26.8.2009 and the licence of the petitioner has suspended. The learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions from the client, who is present in the court agrees for the following order: The impugned order dated 26.8.2009 is set aside and respondent no.2 is directed to pass fresh order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is made clear that till the petitioner is heard and fresh orders are passed by respondent no.2 the licence shall remain in abeyance. With these directions the Rule is disposed of. No costs. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)