2024:BHC-NAG:3606 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1612 OF 20 24 M/s Mahesh Enterprises, A Proprietary Concern, Through its Proprietor Somesh Kamalkishor Bajaj Aged about 28 yrs. Occ. Business, R/o. Flat No.9, Pawan Panorama Apartment, Near Tower Square, Kama Plot, Akola. PETITIONER Versus

1. State of Maharashtra Through The Ministry of Agriculture Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2. Divisional Joint Director of Agriculture, Amravati Division, Amravati.

3. The Insecticide Inspector, C/o: Divisional Joint Director of Agriculture, Amravati Division, Amravati RESPONDENTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ms. A.P. Gupta, Advocate h/f Mr. J.M. Gandhi, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. Alap Palshikar, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3/State.

Mr. A.J. Pathak, Advocate for the Intervenor.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CORAM : BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J.

JUDGMENT RESERVED ON : 20^th MARCH, 2024 JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 26^th MARCH, 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT :-

Heard.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

4. The petitioner is a proprietor concern dealing in business of insecticides and fertilizers on a license granted by the concerned Authority. The respondent No.3/Inspector visited the commercial premises of the petitioner on 21.02.2024 and on inspection submitted a report. The respondent No. 3/Inspector alleged that the petitioner though obtained license, selling insecticides illegally out of the District and the State and some of the insecticides are being sold without necessary permission. He also observed, that some of the clauses mentioned in the license are stands violated. The respondent No. 3/Inspector, while submitted the report, called upon the petitioner to give his say within a period of 7 days. However, on the same day, he delivered an order directing the petitioner not to dispose of any stock in his possession and also issued order to stop the sale, distribution or use of the subject insecticides mentioned in the list annexed with the said order for a period of 21 days therefrom.

5. On 27.02.2024, the petitioner submitted his explanation in writing to the respondent No. 3/Inspector with a request to revoke the order of stopping of sale and distribution of the insecticides. Since no action was taken, the petitioner preferred the present petition with the following prayer.

“PRAYER:- It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:

i. issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling upon the record of proceeding wherein the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 is passed by the Learned Respondent No.3 and after examining the same, further may kindly be pleased to issue the Writ declaring that the Learned respondent No.3 has not proceeded as per the Law and acted in contravention of the provisions of Law and further be pleased to declare the impugned Order dt.21.02.2024 a nullity;

ii. quash and set aside the impugned order dated

21.02.2024 passed by respondent No.3 vide ANNEXURE-1;

iii. stay the effect, operation and execution of impugned Order dated 21.02.2024 during the pendency of petition to enable the petitioner to continue with his business;

iv. saddle the cost of the petition upon the respondents; v. grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, in the interest of justice. ”

6. During the pendency of the present petition, the respondents brought to the notice that another order was passed against the petitioner thereby stopping him from selling the insecticides and fertilizers till further orders. It is the contention of the petitioner, that the second order was not served on him till date. However, the petition is filed with regard to the earlier orders on specific grou