SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule with the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith and heard.

(2.) The above petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of THE Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 25/07/2010 passed by Honourable Minister, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Government of Maharashtra, by which order the revision application filed by the petitioner came to be allowed and resultantly the order dated 30/03/2009 issued by the District Supply Officer, Chandrapurrespondent No.2 was set aside. THE operative part of the order passed by the Honourable Minister, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Government of Maharashtra runs in about six paragraphs. THE petitioner has a grievance in respect of the directions imposing fine and forfeiting the security deposit, which are contained in clause No.3 of the said operative part. THE said clause No.3 would be adverted in the later part of this order.

(3.) The reading of the said clause No.3 ex facie demonstrates that the same appears to be contrary to the observations made by the Honourable Minister, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Government of Maharashtra. It is recorded in paragraph No.5 of the said order that the petitioner had submitted the application to the District Supply Officer, Chandrapurrespondent No.2 on 29/12/2003, which application was filed along with the revisional application filed by the petitioner before the Honourable Minister, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Government of Maharashtra. It is also recorded that the Tahsildar, Rajura in his letter dated 28/02/2005 has stated that the petitioner was supplied kerosene till February 2005. In the teeth of the said facts, the direction as contained in paragraph No.3 to impose fine on the petitioner from 01/01/1994 till the receipt of the application for renewal dated 29/12/2003 and for forfeiting the security amount, in my view, were prima facie unwarranted and unjustified. THE learned Assistant Government Pleader on instructions fairly states that the issue as regards the imposition of fine and forfeiture of security amount may be directed to be considered by the District Supply Officer, Chandrapurrespondent No.2.