Heard Mr. Kamal Sojitra, learned advocate, for Mr. Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner. 2. It transpires from the record and also from the submissions made by learned advocate for the petitioner that the licence granted to the petitioner came to an end, with efflux of time, some where in 2003. The petitioner was required to make application for renewal of licence 180 days before the expiry of the licence period, however, for certain reasons and circumstances, the petitioner was not able to make the application for renewal of licence within prescribed time. Therefore, the period of licence expired.
Subsequently, the petitioner made application for renewal of licence, however, the application was rejected on the ground of delay.
In the appeal preferred by the petitioner, the matter was remanded. The first authority upon remand, again rejected petitioner's request. The appeal against the said decision is also not decided in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner has taken out present petition.
3. In the interregnum, considerable time has lapsed and by now, it is almost 9 years since the petitioner's licence came to an end. True it is that the entire time has passed in prosecuting application before the authority constituted under the Act. Nonetheless, the fact remains that substantial time has passed.
Learned advocate for the petitioner has asserted that at present, lease in respect of the said land is not granted to anybody.
4. In this view of the matter, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner will make application for fresh licence which may be considered by the competent authority without being influenced by the order passed on previous application for renewal.
The request made by the petitioner appears to be proper and justified at this stage.
Therefore, petitioner is allowed to withdraw this petition with a view to making appropriate application for issuance of licence afresh.
If such application is made within 2 weeks from today, then, the competent authority will consider the same in accordance with law, however, while keeping in focus the fact that during the intervening period, the petitioner has been prosecuting his application before the authority constituted under the Act and also in light of the fact that his licence has not been cancelled for any illegality or irregularity on his part, but only because of delay caused in making application for renewal.
4.1 Having regard to the said facts and the applicable provisions, the application may be decided by the competent authority as early as possible preferably within 3 weeks from receipt of the application. The authority may also consider the petitioner's submissions that until now, lease for the said land is not granted to anyone.
With the aforesaid observation and direction, present petition stands disposed of.
Direct service is permitted.
kdc (K.M.Thaker, J.)