JUDGMENT - DESHPANDE R.G., J.:---Rule returnable forthwith. The matter is taken up for hearing with the consent of the parties.

2.Heard Shri Jagtap, Advocate for the petitioner, Mrs. Jog, A.G.P., for respondents Nos. 1 to 3, and Mr. Sambre, Advocate for respondent No. 4.

3.The petitioner Mahila Mandal of a locality known as "Deputy Signal Mahila Mandal" (hereinafter referred to as "Mandal" for the purpose of brevity) has approached this Court challenging the order dated January 22, 2002 passed by the respondent No. 2-Commissioner, State Excise, in Appeal No. 34 of 2001, whereby the learned Commissioner set aside the order dated January 9, 2002 passed by the Collector, Nagpur, whereby the Collector for State Excise-respondent No. 3 has directed the respondent No. 4 shift his shop to some other area by making necessary application for permission to shift, because of objections raised by the residents of the locality.

4.The petitioner Mandal through its President Smt. Chandrakalabai Thakur appeared to be alert and vigilant about social problem muchless which are created because of establishment or installation of country liquor shops in the residential locality that too thickly populated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document