1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5019 OF 2009 (Sham Parmanand Sahu vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. FEBRUARY 17, 2010. Heard Shri Mirza, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Kothari, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 to 3. The Hon’ble Minister has by order dated 11.08.2009 has found that charge No. 2 is proved against the petitioner. Because of that finding, though it has set aside the orders passed by lower authorities, fine of Rs.10,000/- was inflicted upon the petitioner and his licence for retail kerosene has been restored. An inquiry into the kerosene misappropriated by him has also been ordered. Shri Mirza, learned counsel fairly states that he is not aware of the result of the inquiry which has been undertaken in pursuance of impugned order. The learned AGP has attempted to justify the order because of reasons recorded therein and by taking a shelter of the fact that the result of the inquiry ordered by the Hon’ble Minister is still not clear. I have perused the records and I find that the 2 petitioner has not accepted any charge. On the contrary, he has pointed out in relation to charge No. 2 that out of 50 persons, full name of 45 persons have been recorded and in relation to five persons, only their surname could not be recorded. I find that the said reason given by the Hon’ble Minister to inflict the fine of Rs.10,000/- upon the petitioner, is unsustainable. In these circumstances, as that reason does not exist, the amount of fine inflicted upon the petitioner cannot be said to be just and proper. Shri Mirza, learned counsel states that the petitioner has been carrying on his business since last 33 years without any complaint and the petitioner is not interested in amount as such. In view of this, the respondent is permitted to treat the fine amount paid by the petitioner as donation to the fund with the Collector. The impugned order to that extent is set aside. Similarly, the order forfeiting security deposit of the petitioner is set aside. It is clarified that if inquiry for misappropriated (alleged) kerosene is going on, the same may continue in accordance with law and this order shall not affect its result in any way. The authorities are free to proceed further in accordance with law, if in any such inquiry the petitioner is found guilty. Writ Petition is partly allowed. No costs. JUDGE *GS.