Sahara Mahila Bachat Gut, Beed v. State Of Maharashtra And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD (1) WP NO.2755/2015 917 WRIT PETITION NO. 2755 OF 2015 Sahara Mahila Bachat Gut, Gopalpur (Sambhajinagar slum area), Post Kille Dharur, Tq. Kille Dharur, Dist.Beed.
through it's Secretary, Ratnamala w/o Bapurao Kadam, Age 45 yrs., Occu. household, r/o. Gopalpur (Sambhajinagar slum area), Post Kille Dharur, Tq. Kille Dharur, Dist. Beed. ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
1.
The State of Maharashtra, Through it's Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32 AND THREE OTHERS.
...RESPONDENTS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Thombre Bhagwan V. AGP for Respondent State: Mr.N.B.Patil ...
CORAM : R. M. BORDE & P.R. BORA, JJ.
Dated: June 09, 2015 ...
PER COURT :- 1.
The petitioner is praying for issuance of directions to respondents to allot a fair price shop for retail sale of food grains and kerosene in his favour.
agp/-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD (2) WP NO.2755/2015 2.
The respondent authorities issued a notification on 14.8.2013 in pursuance to which petitioner tendered an application. It is the contention of the petitioner that the authorities have not taken any steps, and have not awarded the license to sell food grains through fair price shop in favour of any of the applicants. Petitioner claims that he is eligible for grant of license to operate a fair price shop and that his claim ought to have been considered. 3.
It is not a matter of dispute that none of application has been considered by the respondents, and the process initiated with issuance of proclamation issued on 14.8.2013, has not been taken to its logical end. The petitioners do not have any legal right to claim authorization to open and run a fair price shop for retail sale of food grains or kerosene. It is not the case of the petitioner that overriding his claim, application of some other individual has been considered. The petitioner does not have a right to seek direction for consideration of his claim since, in the instant matter, the claim of none of the applicant has been considered, and the process initiated with publication of notification on 14.8.2013 has not been concluded. The grievance raised by the petitioner in the instant matter is premature and does not deserve consideration. Writ Petition is devoid of substance and hence stands rejected. ( P.R. BORA, J. ) ( R. M. BORDE, J. ) ...
agp/-