(1) WP. 2675.2011+2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2675 OF 2011 Vaijanath Madhavrao Sontakke PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2652 OF 2011 Baburao Venkatrao Kirkan PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS AND WRIT PETITION NO.2667 OF 2011 Chandoji Baburao Patil PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.T. Veer, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. N.B. Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. ..... CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 21ST APRIL, 2011 ORAL ORDER:- 1. In these Writ Petitions, the prayers made by the petitioners are similar. The prayer made in Writ Petition 2675 of 2011 read thus:- (2) WP. 2675.2011+2 "B) To issue the writ of Mandamus or any other writ or direction in the like nature and the respondent no. 2 to 4 may kindly be directed to release the kerosene quota of village Wanegaon, Warkhed & Bhanpur Tq. and Dist. Nanded attached to the Fair Price Shop regularly till the allotment of the regular kerosene retailer license for the village Wanegaon, Warkhed & Bhanpur Tq. and Dist. Nanded" 2. In Writ Petition nos. 2667 of 2011 and Writ Petition no. 2652 of 2011, in addition to the afore- mentioned prayer, the petitioners have also prayed for directions to the respondent to initiate procedure for allotment of kerosene retail licenses in their respective villages. We have perused the Petitions and the annexure thereof. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset invited our attention to the orders, by which petitioners' Fair Price Shops were allowed to distribute kerosene to the card holders in their villages. Admittedly, the petitioners in this Group of Petitions do not hold kerosene retail licenses and that they were permitted to distribute kerosene for the convenience of the card holders in their (3) WP. 2675.2011+2 villages. Their kerosene quota has, admittedly, been discontinued in August, 2010. These Petitions are filed in March, 2011. In other words, the petitioners are not getting kerosene quota since August, 2010. In this backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for similar order, as we have passed in Group of Petitions (Writ Petition nos. 1950 of 2011 to Writ Petition no. 2275 of 2011). In that group of Writ Petitions, all the petitioners had challenged the Government Circular dated 31.1.2011, whereby the Government had decided to discontinue kerosene quota in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court vide judgment dated 21.12.2010 in group of six Writ Petitions. Kerosene quota of the petitioners in that group of Writ Petitions was not discontinued. In those Writ Petitions, the Circular as well as Government resolution dated 3.11.2007 was under challenge and in the facts and circumstances of those cases, we directed the State Government and its authorities not to discontinue kerosene quota of the petitioners till retail kerosene licenses are issued in pursuance of the proclamations already issued and to be issued. (4) WP. 2675.2011+2 4. We do not find any similarity between the Petitions in that group of Writ Petitions and present Writ Petitions. In these Petitions, as mentioned earlier, kerosene quota was discontinued in August, 2010. Moreover, there is no challenge in these Writ Petitions, either to the Circular or to the Government resolution mentioned above. In the circumstances, these Petitions are dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] arp