Sri Aditya Ganguly vs Union Of India And Others on 22 April, 2016
The decision in N.C.Singha & Sons vs. UOI (supra), was taken note of by the High Court of Calcutta in the recent decision in the case of Sri Aditya Ganguly vs. UOI & Ors., (supra), wherein after referring to the said decision, it was pointed out that the Division Bench in that case read the order of suspension not to indicate any reasons why it was immediately necessary to suspend the licence, whereas in the case before the Court, the impugned order of suspension refers to the orders of punishment and the immediate need for suspending the petitioner's licence is evident from the order. It was pointed out that the suspension is the more important limb of the relevant expression and the perception of the necessity must be left to the officer entitled to exercise such authority. Further, it was pointed out that an order of suspension cannot be challenged in the extra-ordinary jurisdiction as being without jurisdiction by calling upon the court to take a different view on the ground of necessity; if the prescribed authority perceives the suspension to be necessary, it has to be accepted at face value and, though the same can be questioned in the post-decisional hearing, it cannot be subjected to a judicial review unless it is palpably absurd.