Jharkhand High Court
Saurav Kumar Agrawal & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 6 November, 2012
Author: Narendra Nath Tiwari
Bench: Narendra Nath Tiwari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (C) No. 2144 of 2012
Saurav Kumar Agrawal & Others ..... Petitioners
Versus
Union of India, through the Department of Food and Public Distribution, New Delhi & Others
..... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
-----
For the Petitioners - Mr. A.K.Agrawal
For the Respondents - Mr. J.C to G.P-III
-----
7/6.11.2012I. A. No. 2377/2012 In this application, the petitioners have prayed for deletion of the name of the petitioner No.3 from the cause title of this writ petition. It has been submitted that though the case of the petitioner No.3 is different, she has inadvertently joined this writ petition and in that view, she does not want to proceed with this writ petition and the prayer has been made for deletion of her name from the cause title of this writ petition.
Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the said prayer. Considering the above, this application is allowed.
The name of the petitioner No.3 is deleted from the cause title of this writ petition.
(NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J) W. P. (C) No. 2144 of 2012 In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 21.3.2012 (Annexure-2) passed by the Special Rationing Officer, Ranchi, whereby the petitioners' P.D.S licenses have been cancelled.
The sole grievance of the petitioners is that the impugned order has been passed without giving any notice informing the reasons and without affording any opportunity to represent against the same.
It has been submitted that the impugned order has been passed in violation of Clause 11 of the Bihar Trade Articles (License and Unification) Order, 1984 [hereinafter referred to as 'the said Order'] as well as the principle of natural justice and is ab initio void. The impugned order is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the licenses were granted to the petitioners on compassionate ground under the policy decision of the Government in the year 2010. Their licenses cannot be cancelled without giving any notice informing the reasons or without affording any opportunity of representation against the same.
Learned J.C to G.P-V appearing on behalf of the respondents contested the writ petition. It has been stated, inter alia, that there is no arbitrariness or illegality in the impugned order. It was found that licenses were granted contrary to the policy decision and the provisions of law. Those licenses were reviewed and were found fit for cancellation. The petitioners' licenses were found to be illegally granted and is accordingly cancelled by the impugned order.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that the petitioners' licenses have been cancelled by a summary order. Before cancelling the petitioners' license, no notice was given to the petitioners informing the reasons and affording them opportunity to represent against the same. Clause 11 of the said Order, 1984 provides for giving reasonable opportunity of representation to the person before cancelling his license. Cancellation of the petitioners' licenses visits them with civil consequence. In that view also, cancellation of the petitioners' licenses without giving them notice and opportunity of representation / hearing is violative of the principle of natural justice.
Considering the above, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 21.3.2012 passed by the Special Rationing Officer, Ranchi (Annexure-2) is quashed.
However, if there is any legal justification for proceeding against the petitioners' licenses, the respondents are at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
S.K (NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J)