1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6392 OF 2009 Vividh Karyakari Seva Society. ... Applicant. V/s. Tahsildar, Barshi & Anr. ... Respondents. Mr. Surel Shah for the Applicant. Ms. Q.S. Cardozo, AGP for Respondents 1 and 2. CORAM : ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. & S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 23RD FEBRUARY 2010. P.C. :- Admit. 2. At the request of the learned Advocates, the Appeal is finally heard today. 3. The short question involved in this Appeal is whether the impugned action taken on the basis of a report based on an inquiry made by the Tehsildar, Barshi and confirmed by the learned Single Judge was just and legal. 4. It is not in dispute that the inquiry ought to have been made by the District Supply Officer, Barshi whereas it was made by the Tehsildar, Barshi. The impugned order dated 26th December 2008 passed by the Tehsildar had been challenged 2 in the Writ Petition and the Petition has been rejected. 5. The learned AGP has fairly submitted that the necessary inquiry ought to have been made by the District Supply Officer, Barshi. 6. In the result, the impugned order passed by the Tehsildar and order passed by the learned Single Judge are quashed and set aside. The Appeal is allowed with no order as to costs. 7. Needless to say that it would be open to the District Supply Officer, Barshi to make necessary inquiry in accordance with law so as to find out if the allegations levelled against the Petitioner are correct. The inquiry, if to be made, shall be concluded as soon as possible and preferably within two weeks from the date of this order by the District Supply Officer. CHIEF JUSTICE (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)