1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5169 OF 2009 Girja Maschya Vyavsaik Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Phulambri, Tq.Phulambri, Dist.Aurangabad, Through its Chairman Shri Manohar s/o.Punjaji Bansode, Age-37 years, Occu : Fisherman and Business of Fair Price Shop, R/o.Phulambri, Tq.Phulambri, Dist.Aurangabad PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Maharashtra State Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Hon’ble Minister, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Maharashtra State Mantralaya, Mumbai. 3. The Desk Officer, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection Department, Maharashtra State Mantralaya, Mumbai, 4. The Dy. Commissioner (Supply), Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. 2 5. The District Supply Officer, Aurangabad. 6. The Tahsildar, Tahsil Office, Phulambri, Aurangabad. 7. Balkrishna S/o.Kondiba Wankhede, Age-20 years, Occu-Business, R/o.Phulambri, Tq.Phulambri, District : Aurangabad 8. Additional Collector, Aurangabad, Taluka and Dist. Aurangabad RESPONDENTS Mr.R.T.Nagargoje, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr.K.B.Chaudhary, learned AGP for respondent no.1 to 6 and 8 Mr.A.N.Kakade, learned counsel for respondent no.7 (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 18/08/2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. This is a petition at the behest of a Society seeking to challenge the order passed by the respondent no.2 Minister dated 02/03/2009, allowing the revision filed by the present respondent no.7. 3 3. It appears that a Fair Price Shop came to be allotted to the petitioner’s society through its Chairman. This shop was allotted by The Sub Divisional Officer, Aurangabad. Some time in the year 2007, the then Chairman expired and consequently necessary applications came to be moved for permitting the Society to run the said Fair Price Shop through the Chairman who was the Chairman then elected. It appears that by order dated 06/06/2007, the aforesaid necessary permission came to be accorded and licenses also came to be issued. Meanwhile it appears that legal heirs of the deceased Chairman submitted an application to The District Supply Officer contending therein that the license has been issued in the name of deceased Chairman and was not issued in the name of Society and consequently the license should therefore be transferred in the name of legal heirs of the deceased Chairman. It appears that the aforesaid application came to be rejected and the legal heirs of deceased Chairman being aggrieved by the aforesaid decision, challenged the same in revision before the Additional Commissioner. The Additional Commissioner also dismissed the aforesaid revision. In the said revision before the Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad, the present petitioner was not joined as a respondent. Be that as it may, the Additional Commissioner Aurangabad by his order dated 27/04/2007 dismissed the revision. Curiously also the present petitioner was not joined as a respondent to the said revision. The aforesaid revision came to be allowed by the respondent no.2 Minister by the judgment dated 02/03/2009. By virtue of the aforesaid judgment, the orders which had been passed in favour of the 4 petitioner came to be set aside and it was directed that the license of Fair Price Shop should be transferred in the name of respondent no. 7. Consequent to the said order, certain steps are being initiated by the respondents for carrying out the order of respondent no.2 Minister. 4. We have heard Shri.Nagargoje, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri.Kakade, learned counsel for the respondent no.7, and learned AGP who appears on behalf of other respondents. It is the contention of respondent no.7 that the Chairman of the present petitioner Society is no longer the Chairman of the Society as the said Chairman had been disqualified in the year 2008 on account of statutory disqualification. It is urged before us that the order which is annexed by the respondent no.7 in his affidavit in reply has not been challenged in further round of litigation and therefore the disqualification of the Chairman has attained finality. 5. In the present matter, we are not concerned whether the Chairman is in fact the Chairman of the petitioner Society. What is apparent to us is that certain orders which had been passed in favour of petitioner Society came to be quashed and set aside behind back of the petitioner Society. The petitioner Society was not made respondent in the revision before the Minister, and consequently an order has been passed in flagrant violation of the principle of natural justice. The aforesaid principles have been breached in as much as the petitioner Society which had been granted the aforesaid license 5 has been striped of the said license and those license have been directed to be handed over to the respondent no.7. The order of the respondent no.2 which is impugned in the present petition visits the petitioner with civil consequences and this has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing. In the light of that therefore the order passed by respondent no.2 is wholly unsustainable in Law and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 6. Accordingly, the aforesaid order is hereby quash and set aside and the matter is remitted back to respondent no.2 for a decision afresh in accordance with Law after joining the petitioner as a respondent to the said revision. This amendment to be carried out by respondent no.7 within 4 weeks from today, failing which it would be presumed that the respondent no.7 does not wish to proceed with the hearing of said revision before respondent no.2 Minister and the said revision would stand dismissed. 7. Rule is thus made absolute on the terms indicated above with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/AUGUST 2009/wp5169-09 6