Madhya Pradesh High Court
Firm Mahakal Fire Shop Thru.Late Shri ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2018
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
W.P. No.7802/15 (-1-)
W.P. No.7802/15 & W.P. No.7804/15
(Firm Mahakal Fire Shop and others Vs. The State of Madhya
Pradesh and others)
Indore, dated:08.02.2018
None for the petitioner.
Ms. Bhakti Vyas, learned counsel for the respondents.
Regard being had to the similitude in the controversy involved in the present cases, the writ petitions were analogously heard and by a common order, they are being disposed of by this Court. Facts of the Writ Petition No.7802/2015 are narrated hereunder.
2. Present writ petition has been filed by the five petitioners against the order dated 17.09.2015 passed by the District Magistrate in exercise of powers conferred under Section 6(D) of the Explosive Act 1984 r/w Rules 118 of the Explosive Rules, 2008 cancelling the licence granted in favour of the petitioners under the Explosive Act. Present petition has also been filed against the order dated 05.11.2015 passed by the learned Commissioner, Ujjain Division, Ujjain.
3. The petitioners' contention is that they were granted licence for sale and purchase of the crackers and they have not violated any condition of the licence and, therefore, the order passed by the respondents are bad in law.
4. A detailed and exhaustive reply has been filed by the respondents and the respondents have stated that the licence HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.7802/15 (-2-) under the provisions of Explosive Act, 1984 was granted to the petitioners and during inspection various irregularities were noticed and thereafter, the show-cause notice were issued to all of the licence holders and as their replies have not been found satisfactory. The District Magistrate has passed the impugned order and thereafter, the appeals of the petitioners have also been dismissed. The respondents have prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. This Court has carefully gone through the writ petition as well as the replies filed by the respondents. The facts of the case reveal that on on 25.11.2012, licence for sale and purchase was granted in favour of the petitioners under the provisions of the Explosive Act and on 24.05.2014, an inspection took place and irregularities were noticed by the competent authorities and consequent to which, a show- cause notice was issued on 16.07.2014. The petitioners did submit replies to the show-cause notices and on 22.07.2014, the District Magistrate directed the Sub Divisional Magistrate to carryout the inspection of the place from where the crackers were being sold and thereafter, second show- cause notice was issued on 09.10.2014.
6. Again reply was filed and finally, the order has been passed on 17.09.2015 on account of violation of provisions of Explosive Act r/w Rules, 2008 and appeal has been dismissed on 05.11.2015 in all cases. The aforesaid facts HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.7802/15 (-3-) relate to the cancellation of the licence of the petitioner No.1. In respect of petitioner No.2, the same procedure was followed and licence was cancelled on 17.09.2015 and the appeal was dismissed on 05.11.2015. In respect of petitioner Nos.3, 4 and 5, dates are same in respect of cancellation of licence and dismissal of the appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the State Government has argued before this Court that in the recent past, a large number of casualties have taken place as the go-downs/shops were situated in densely populated local area and, therefore, by way of abundant caution and as there was violation of the terms and conditions of the licence, the licences granted in favour of the petitioners have rightly been cancelled.
8. Learned government advocate has argued before this Court that the question of interference by this Court does not arise as the procedure prescribed has been followed by the respondents. There was enough material with the respondents to cancel the licence. She has also argued that sufficiency of material cannot be looked into by this Court though there was sufficient material. She has also argued that this Court cannot look into the decision making process which is under challenge.
09. In the considered opinion of this Court, as the record establishes that there was enough material to cancel the licences of the petitioners as the shops were situated in HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE W.P. No.7802/15 (-4-) densely populated area and as there was violation of terms and conditions of licence, the authorities have followed the prescribed procedure while cancelling the licence of the petitioners.
10. This Court as the respondents have followed the prescribed procedure as provided in the Explosive Rules, 2008 r/w Explosive Act, 1984, does not find any reason to interfere with the impend order. Resultantly, both the writ petitions stand dismissed.
(S.C. Sharma)
N.R. Judge
Digitally signed by NARENDRA
KUMAR RAIPURIA
Date: 2018.02.26 11:49:35 +05'30'