1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5593 OF 2010 Shri. Bhagwanbaba Sarvajanik Wachnalaya, Tokewadi, Tq. Wadvani, Dist. Beed. Through its Secretary Ashok s/o. Sitram Kekan, Age 24 yrs., Occu. Agri., R/o. Tokewadi, Tq. Wadvani, Dist. Beed. ....Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Department Library Directorate, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Director, Library Directorate, Maharashtra State, Mumbai. 3. The Assistant Library Director, Aurangabad. ....Respondents. Mr. R.V. Gore, Advocate for petitioner. Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED : 21st October, 2010. ORAL ORDER : [ PER B.R. GAVAI, J.] 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 22nd of March 2010 vide which the recognition granted to the 2 petitioner as a 'public library' came to be cancelled. 3. Heard Shri. Gore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Gondhalekar, learned A.G.P. appearing for respondents. 4. The learned A.G.P. submits that cancellation is on the ground, that the petitioner library is having subscription of only three newspapers whereas the requirement is of five newspapers. 5. We have perused the Government Resolution dated 15th September 2006. From the perusal of the said Government Resolution, it is seen that there is no requirement, which requires that five newspapers have to be kept in the library. Perusal of the Government Resolution dated 15th of September 2006 would reveal that new criteria is provided for grant of recognition to the public libraries. The ground on which the recognition is cancelled, does not find place in the criteria, which is fixed by the Government Resolution dated 15th of September 2006. 6. Apart from that, it can be seen, that it is stated in the affidavit in reply, that complaints were received against the petitioner library and on the basis of the complaint recognition granted to the petitioner library has been cancelled. It is settled principle of law that when an order, adverse to the interest of a party, is passed, it is required to be preceded by the principles of natural justice. Admittedly, no show cause notice 3 was found to be given nor an opportunity of being heard is given to the petitioner. As such, the impugned order also suffers on the ground of violation of principal of natural justice. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause "B". [ A. A. SAYED ] [ B. R. GAVAI ] Judge Judge ssc/wp5593.10