SHRI. RAMESHREDDY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. The learned AGP and the learned advocate for the contesting respondents waive service. At the request of both the sides, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) The petitioner by invoking the powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is taking exception to the order passed by the learned Minister dtd. 28/2/2019 in purported exercise of the powers of revision under Sec. 138 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (herein after the Act). He has allowed the Revision and quashed and set aside the order passed by the Respondent No.2 - Commissioner of State Excise dtd. 25/11/2016 by which the latter had quashed and set aside the order passed by the Respondent No.3 - Collector dtd. 7/12/2010. The learned Collector had declared that after demise of the original licence holder of CL-III by name Muttamreddy, his two sons that is the petitioner and the respondent No.6 and the two daughters i.e. the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are equally entitled to succeed to the CL-III licence.

(3.) The checkered history leading to the filing of the Writ Petition as is relevant can be summarized as under :