Heard learned advocate for the petitioner.
The petitioner, by way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the order dated 9/11.03.2011, whereunder, the respondent no. 2 has issued an order intimating the petitioner that his licence as Stamp Vendor is revoked. Admittedly, when the petitioner issued this communication, no opportunity whatsoever is afforded to the petitioner nor has petitioner been put to the notice of the fact that there is likelihood of rejection of his application for renewal of licence on account of allegations contained in the communication. The bare minimum requirement of principle of natural justice is not observed.
The court called learned AGP Ms. Patel on advance copy to receive instructions in this behalf and learned AGP could not controvert the fact that no notice is issued and submits that in case if the court is inclined to accept this petition only on that limited ground, let there be a liberty to the concerned Collector to decide the matter afresh after issuing show cause notice and complying with the provisions of principles of natural justice, otherwise also, the concerned collector has indicated his inability to quash the order and submitted that the court may pass appropriate order.
In light of the inability expressed by concerned Collector - the respondent no.2 herein and in view of the fact that there exists undisputed fact with regard to clear non-compliance of the principles of natural justice, the order impugned cannot be sustained for a minute and therefore, same is required to be quashed and set aside and is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent no. 2 shall have liberty to proceed in the matter in accordance with principles of natural justice, wherein, in case, if the allegations mentioned in the communication, which is quashed, are proposed to be relied upon, then, the petitioner is required to be put to notice thereof and his explanation is required to be called for and if needed, he is required to be given an opportunity of being heard personally or through any representative.
With this observation, the petition is disposed of. It goes without saying that quashing of the communication impugned in this petition is not entitled the petitioner on the strength thereof to resume him as Stamp Vendor, as, as per the say of the petitioner, the licence has came to an end in March, 2010. Direct service permitted.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) pallav Top