-: 1 :- HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 8208 of 2009 Sanjiv S. Thorat. ..Petitioner. Versus District Supply Officer, Sangli & Others. ..Respondents. Mr. Kedar Patil for the Petitioner. Mr. C. R. Sonawane, AGP for the Respondent – State. Coram : S. B. Mhase & R. M. Savant, JJ. Date : September 25, 2009. P. C. : 1. This petition can be disposed of by giving certain directions to the Respondent State. The Petitioner has challenged the order dated 27th August 2009, as a result of which, fair price shop licence of the Petitioner has been suspended, without issuing any notice. 2. The said order has been challenged by the Petitioner by filing Revision Application under Clause­30 of the Maharashtra Food Grain and Rationing (Second) Order, 1966. The concerned Department has accepted the Revision Application but the concerned Revisional Authority has not heard the Petitioner and passed the necessary -: 2 :- orders on the ground that the code of conduct is in force, and he is, therefore, unable to pass the order. 3. Mr. C. R. Sonawane, the learned AGP appearing for the State, on instructions from Mr. Tarabadkar, Under Secretary of the Food and Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection Department, states that as the code of conduct is in force, the Revision Application is not heard and there is dispute in respect of the said fact. 4. At this stage, we do not want to enter into the question, as to whether on account of the code of conduct, the concerned Minister can hear the matter or not, because, under clause 30 an alternative arrangement is provided. Clause 30 reads thus : “Clause­30. “Power to call for and examine records of proceedings and revise orders. The State Government, or in the Bombay Rationing Area an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary to Government designted by the State Government in this behalf, and elsewhere the Commissioner of the Division, may on an application made to it or him by an aggrieved person within 30 days, from the date of receipt by him of any oreder by which he is aggrieved, stay the enforcement of such order if considered necessary and may call for and examine the record of any inquiry or proceedings of any officer exercising or failing to exercise the powers under this Order to add to, amend, vary, suspend or cancel any authorisation issued or deemed to be issued under -: 3 :- clause 3 or any ration card issued deemed to be issued under clause 7 or to forfiet the deposit (or any part thereof) paid or deemd to be paid by a ration shop or authorised agent as security or to take any other action under the provisions prescribed by or under this order, for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the legality or propriety of the order passed by such Officer, and as to the regularity of t he proceedings of such officer, and may pass such order thereon as it or he, as the case may be, thinks fit: Provided that, the State Government, may at any time, during the pendency of any inquiry or proceedings or within one year from the date of any order passed by any officer under the provisions prescribed by or under this order, suo motu,, stay and pending inquiry or proceedings or the enforcement of such order if considered necessary and may, call for an examine the record of any such inquiry or proce3edings and pass such order thereon as it thinks fit. Provided further that, the State Government or the designated officer of the Commissioner, shall not pass any order under this clause which adversely affects any person, unless such person has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.” 5. On reading Clause – 30, it is clear that revisional power is with the State Government. However, in respect of the Bombay Urban Area, an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary to the Government designated by the State Government in this behalf is authorised and elsewhere, “the Commissioner” is vested with the power to entertain and decide the Revisional Application under -: 4 :- section 30. Only in respect of the Bombay Rationing Area, it is necessary for the State Government to designate an officer not below the rank of the Deputy Secretary to the Government in this behalf, so that the said officer can dispose of the matter. In view of the said position, the State Government is directed to issue appropriate orders regarding designating an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary to the Government as contemplated under clause 30, so that the matter of the Petitioner and the other similar applications of applicants can be decided by the authority. This exercise shall be done within two weeks. 6. On such officer being designated, this Revision Application be placed before the said Officer. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the above Petition stands disposed of. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.)