( 1 ) FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. W.P.NO.4909/2008 Santosh Gangaram Kanadje. -vs- The State of Mah. and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKAR, J. DATE : 12/12/2008 Heard Advocate Puri for petitioner, Advocate Khubalkar for respondent No.3 and learned A.G.P. for respondents No.1 and 2. Advocate Puri points out that the Deputy Commissioner (Supplies) has allowed the appeal of present petitioner after noticing that there was no irregularity in records maintained and statement of card holders were not consistent. He states that this position has not been appreciated at all by respondent No.1 while passing the impugned orders on 7th November, 2008. According to him, thus there is failure or refusal to exercise jurisdiction. ( 2 ) Advocate Khubalkar and learned AGP pointed out that in the impugned order the respondent No.1 Revisional Authority has relied on the statements of card holders, which reveal that he was selling kerosene by charging more amount and was delivering less quantity thereof. The same practice is also reported in relation to food grains. They state that this finding itself sufficient to sustain the orders. Upon perusal of both the orders passed by respondent No.1, I am satisfied that respondent No.1 has not considered the position emerging from record. On record there is an order of Deputy Commissioner (Supplies), which mentioned that the statement of card holders were not consistent with each other and perusal of records of fair price shop and kerosene outlet of petitioner did not reveal any irregularity. It is therefore apparent that respondent No.1 has not correctly applied the mind and in any case material available on record has not been considered. The said order dated 7th November, 2008 is therefore quashed ( 3 ) and set aside. Matters are remanded back to respondent No.1 for adjudication in accordance with law as early as possible and in any case by 15th March, 2009 after hearing the parties in the matters. Rule accordingly. No costs. JUDGE gsk