Muktai Bahu Udeshiya Mahila Mandal Through Its Chairman Pratibha Sanjay Patil And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WP 8035/17 - 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.8035/2017 Muktai Bahu Udeshiya Mahila Mandal, through its Chairman Pratibha Sanjay Patil & another.

...Petitioners..

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & others.

...Respondents...

.....

Shri Amol N. Kakade, Advocate for petitioners. Smt.Archana V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 4.

.....

CORAM: DR.MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ. & R.M. BORDE, J.

DATE: 30.06.2017 ORDER :

1] Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2] The petitioner is before this Court contending that in terms of advertisement / proclamation dated 31.10.2013, license to run a fair price shop and distribution of kerosene came to be implemented only in the year 2017 after a gap of four years, therefore, the petitioner has also lost a chance since its establishment

WP 8035/17 - 2 - came into existence after the advertisement came to be issued.

3] We fail to understand the locus standi of the petitioner. The petitioner apparently cannot challenge the issuance of license in favour of respondent nos.5 and 6 in a public interest litigation, since the petitioner itself is interested in obtaining such a license. The grievance seems to be that as on the date of the advertisement, the petitioner was not even born and now before the issuance of license, it has taken a shape and, therefore, it is aggrieved by grant of license in favour of respondent nos.5 and 6. The petitioner, not being a competitor in terms of the advertisement issued in 2013, we are of the opinion that there is no locus standi for the petitioner to come before this Court seeking the reliefs sought in the petition.

4] The petition is dismissed. No costs.

(R.M. BORDE, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE ndk/c306172.doc