caw959-11.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.959 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3916 OF 2010 M/s.Suryanagar Cons.Co-op. Society Ltd .. Applicant versus State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Mr.M.V.Aiya for the applicant. Mr.R.M.Patne, A.G.P for respondent Nos.1 to 4. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 14th JUNE 2011. P.C.: . At the hearing of this civil application, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposed of by consent of the parties. 2 The challenge in this writ petition is to an order passed by the Minister (Food and Civil Supplies) so also Consumer Affairs, Government of Maharashtra dated 20th February 2010. caw959-11.doc 2 The petitioner had moved the said Minister aggrieved by an order of the Deputy Controller, Rationing dated 21st October 2009. By that order the petitioner’s licence of a fair price shop has been suspended on the ground that there were some bogus entries in the ration card and, therefore, there was excess supply of food grains and other essential commodities. 3 The petitioner has pointed out that the Minister has not considered important and vital material inasmuch as the authorities themselves have stated that there was no complaint about any bogus ration cards. The documents which are part of the record and particularly annexures to the civil application have not been considered by the Minister and yet he proceeded to uphold the order of suspension. In these circumstances, the submission of Mr.Aiya is that the impugned order violates the principles of natural justice and is grossly unfair and unjust. The suspension is because of political grounds and not for any violation of terms and conditions of the licence or the provisions of the control order. caw959-11.doc 3 4 Having perused the order under challenge, so also the contents of the civil application and the writ petition, I am satisfied that the writ petition need not be kept pending. The petitioner was given an authorisation to run a ration shop and which authorisation is now suspended. The suspension is effected on 20th September 2009. In these circumstances and when there is prima facie case made out that the Minister’s order is vitiated by non application of mind to relevant and important material, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. 5 The revision application shall be now re-heard by the State Government in accordance with law after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to inspect the entire reocrd and take copies of relevant documents at the costs of the petitioner. After the inspection is given of the entire file, the petitioner shall be heard by the Appellate Authority and he will make an order afresh on merits without being influenced in any manner by the observations in the impugned order. Needless to state that the petitioner would be at liberty to apply for appropriate relief after the revisional proceedings are concluded. The Revisional caw959-11.doc 4 Authority to dispose of the matter afresh as directed above within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also at liberty to produce such material as is permissible in law at the hearing that will be conducted by the Revisional Authority. Writ petition is disposed off in above terms. No costs. 6 In view of disposal of the writ petition, civil application also does not survive and the same is disposed off. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)