Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard Shri K.S. Kushwaha for the petitioner; the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents nos. 1 to 6 and perused the record.
Considering the nature of the order that we propose to pass as also the ground on which we propose to pass the order, the learned Standing Counsel has agreed for final disposal of this petition at this stage itself without awaiting for a response to the averments made in the writ petition.
The petitioner had applied for a 'no objection certificate' from the Fire Department under the U.P. Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Act, 2005. The said application was submitted online. The relevant fields for online submission were filled by the petitioner. On the information furnished by the petitioner, a 'no objection certificate' was issued on 12.6.2021 in favour of the petitioner. On 7.7.2021, the Chief Fire Officer passed the impugned order cancelling the 'no objection certificate' on the ground that from the report submitted by the Incharge Fire Officer, Ghazipur, it appears that some litigation is pending in respect of the premises of the building concerned and as that information was not provided, the 'no objection certificate' was liable to be cancelled.
The impugned order has been challenged, inter alia, on two grounds: (a) that the fields on which online submission of the application for grant of 'no objection certificate' was to be made did not require the petitioner or the applicant to make a disclosure in respect of any pending litigation therefore, on that ground, the 'no objection certificate' ought not to have been rescinded; and (b) that no opportunity of hearing was accorded to the petitioner before cancellation of the 'no objection certificate'.
We have perused the impugned order. A perusal thereof does not reveal that any opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner before cancellation of the 'no objection certificate'. No doubt, the Chief Fire Officer has observed in the impugned order that the petitioner had not made proper disclosure with regard to the pending proceedings but there is nothing in the impugned order to disclose whether there existed a column in the online application to be submitted requiring the applicant to make such disclosure. Even otherwise, whether such disclosure was relevant in respect of issuance of 'no objection certificate' is not disclosed in the impugned order.
The petitioner has specifically stated in para 35 of the writ petition that there was no requirement in the online application regarding furnishing of such information as has been stated in the impugned order. In para 34, it has been specifically stated that the impugned order was passed without any notice and opportunity of hearing.
Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that though there is no specific requirement in the application form for making a disclosure but there is a provision in the application form to annex other documents.
Be that as it may, in absence of requirement to make a specific disclosure, if the person concerned, who has applied for the 'no objection certificate' has not made a disclosure, he could always be required to make such disclosure by a notice and if he has not been required to make such a disclosure and 'no objection certificate' has been issued, at least before cancellation of such 'no objection certificate', he should be given an opportunity to submit his explanation.
As from the order impugned and also from the averments made in the writ petition, it does not appear that opportunity of hearing was accorded to the petitioner before cancellation of the 'no objection certificate', we deem it appropriate to allow this petition. The order dated 7.7.2021 passed by the fourth respondent is hereby quashed. The fourth respondent shall be at liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, after calling for explanation from the petitioner.
Order Date :- 19.8.2021 A. V. Singh