- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7163/2009 Vyankat Jalba Waghmare. ...Petitioner.. Versus The Tahsildar, Naigaon Tq.Naigaon Dist.Nanded, and others. ...Respondents... ..... Shri A.N. Nagargoje, Advocate for petitioner. Shri V.B. Ghatge, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 5. Shri K.M. Nagarkar, Advocate for respondent no.6. ..... - 2 - CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL, J. DATE: 21.07.2010 PER COURT: 1] Heard counsel for the parties. 2] The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that deliberately certain persons are complaining against the petitioner as he is running a fair price shop. Twice the attempts failed, but still as some sections of complainants are against the petitioner, further complaint was made on false grounds with the sole purpose to cancel the licence of the petitioner to run the fair price shop. The petitioner challenged the order, which was passed adverse to him, before the Commissioner, who dismissed his appeal. The revision filed before the Minister came to be partly allowed and disposed of by an order dated 29.8.2009. The Minister imposed fine of Rs.10,000/- on the petitioner due to lacunae revealed during the investigation conducted by the Government officer. At the same time, the Minister directed re- inquiry of the entire allegations made against the petitioner. 3] The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is one more apprehension with the petitioner that the respondent no.6 – complainant has also challenged the impugned order passed by the Minister in this Court by way of Writ Petition No.6449/2009, which came to be rejected by this Court on 12.11.2009. It - 3 - is submitted that the review petition was also filed against the said order and in case the present petition is disposed of, it would affect the petitioner’s interest in that petition. 4] Shri V.B. Ghatge, learned AGP submits that in accordance with the order passed by the Minister, fresh inquiry ought to have been initiated and in case it is not finalised, the competent authority would conduct the inquiry after following the principles of natural justice after hearing the petitioner, the complainant and other ration card holders of the village and submit a detailed report in that respect and take a final decision. 5] Considering the documents placed on record and the submissions advanced and the order passed by the Minister, I am of the view that in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the order passed by the Minister does not call for interference by this Court. 6] The competent officer shall hold inquiry, if not already conducted, under the orders passed by the Minister in his order dated 29.8.2009 and the inquiry shall be completed within a period of three months from today. The contesting parties shall be heard in such inquiry. The inquiry officer shall verify the record and take steps in accordance with law. In case the petitioner is absolved from charges in the inquiry, then the petitioner is at liberty to file an application with the Minister for modification of the order by praying for repayment of amount of fine of Rs.10,000/-, - 4 - which, according to petitioner, has already been deposited with the concerned Sub Divisional Officer. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. (Naresh H. Patil, J.) ndk/c217102