Disposed

Saylu Baburao Dhansar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC10 Sept 2014WP/4614/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order rejecting his kerosene licence renewal. Court directed Chief Supply Officer to reconsider without being barred by earlier order and disposed of the writ petition. Subject to public distribution arrangements.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach District Supply Officer within four weeks for fresh consideration, unaffected by earlier rejection order. Petition disposed.

Saylu Baburao Dhansar Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

wp4614.14

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 4614 OF 2014

¶5

SAYLU BABURAO DHANSAR VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Deshpande Gaurav L AGP for Respondents: Mr. A.V. Deshmukh

¶8

CORAM : R. M. BORDE AND

¶9

V. K. JADHAV, JJ.

¶10

DATED : 10^th SEPTEMBER, 2014

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the order issued on 19.5.2009 by Tahsildar, Degloor. By virtue of the said order, the Tahsildar, Degloor directed some alternate arrangement in respect of distribution of kerosene. It is recorded in the order that arrangement is made for temporary duration and until issuance of further orders in the matter. After presentation of instant writ petition, the District Supply Officer, Nanded issued an order on 26.6.2014 and rejected the alleged application tendered by the petitioner for renewal of licence.

¶13

The petitioner contends that the licence issued to him is already renewed and is operative till 31.12.2014 and that it was not

¶14

wp4614.14

¶15

-2-

¶16

permissible for the District Supply Officer to issue an order rejecting the alleged application of the petitioner for renewal of licence. The order appears to have been passed by the District Supply Officer Nanded on 26.6.2014 without going through the record.

¶17

In the circumstances, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the District Supply Officer, Nanded with appropriate application putting forth his grievance, within a period of four weeks from today.

¶18

If the petitioner tenders an application to the District Supply Officer within four weeks from today, the District Supply Officer shall consider the same and pass appropriate order without being impeded by his earlier order dated 26.6.2014. The District Supply Officer shall pass appropriate order as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt of application of the petitioner.

¶19

With aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶20

rlj/

Saylu Baburao Dhansar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saylu Baburao Dhansar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lata Pravin Chandan Vs the Union of India and Another

Atmaram Shrirangrao Pawar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kishor Gangadhar Deobone Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vishwanath Raghunath Dubukwad Vs Assistant Registrar (Milk) Cooperative Societies, Latur and Others

Pratibha Shrikrishna Pendse Died Thr. Lrs. Mahesh Rajendra Pendse Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vanita Narayan Lathi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others