Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1990 DIGILAW 465 (MAD)

Ms. B. Ramaswamy and Company v. District Supply Officer, Licensing Authority of North Arcot Ambedkar and Another

1990-07-09

KANAKARAJ

body1990
Judgment :- The writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 13-11-1989 and to direct the respondents to restore the normal supply of kerosene to the petitioner who is a wholesale licence holder. The impugned order says that the petitioner did not lift the quantity of kerosene allotted to him and that the accounts had not been kept properly and, therefore, exercising power under Clause 20(2) of the Tamil Nadu Kerosene (Regulation of Trade) Order 1973 the 1st respondent had suspended the licence in facour of the petitioner. The argument addressed on behalf of the petitioner is that under Clause 20(2) of the Order, the suspension can only be for a period of 90 days. Clause 20(2) of the Order says that the competent authority "may by an order in writing suspend, pending enquiry, for a period not exceeding 90 days, the authorisation issued to a wholesale or retailer if he has reason to believe that any contravention of the terms and conditions has taken or is about to take place; provided that within three days of such order, the grounds of suspension indicating as far as possible the facts and the provisions of law, order or conditions of licence or registration certificate which prima facie, are violated shall be communicated." * 2. In this case, the grounds on which the order of suspension has been issued are stated in the impugned order itself. But, the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order of suspension can be only for 90 days. In my view, it is necessary that the order of suspension should mention the period of suspension as 90 days or a period lesser than 90 days. If the order of suspension is not revoked or if final orders are not passed in the enquiry within 90 days, automatically the order of suspension will cease to have effect. Unfortunately, in this case, the writ petition has been filed on 30th November, 1989 and a stay order has been obtained. It is, therefore, made clear that the order of suspension will remain in force only for a period of 90 days from the date of the order of suspension, excluding the period of stay granted by this Court. The writ petition is ordered in the above terms. There will be no order as to costs. Order accordingly.