(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7118 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 7118 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 7118 OF 2004 Hotel Rangeela & Anr ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ..... Mr. P.C. Kansara, counsel for Petitioners Mr. A.H. Palekar, A.G.P. for Respondents. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. DATED: 16TH MARCH, 2005 DATED: 16TH MARCH, 2005 DATED: 16TH MARCH, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard Mr. Kansara, the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The Petitioners’ application for licence to run a live Orchestra and a dance bar was rejected by the Collector, and therefore, the petitioner filed an appeal before the State Government. The appeal has also been dismissed by the impugned order dated 21.8.2004. 3. Perusal of the order passed by the lower appellate authority clearly shows that the parties were heard, record from the District Collector, Solapur was called for and on perusal of the said (-2-) record,the Minister concerned formed an opinion so as to preserve the law and order and public peace. The reasoning given by the lower appellate authority cannot be termed as perverse or manifestly erroneous and it is a possible view based on record and public opinion. Under these circumstances, no interference is called for in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. Hence, the petition is rejected summarily.