JUDGMENT 1. - At the out set it may be stated that inspite of the fact that a show-cause notice was given to the respondents by this Court on October 19, 1992 and after service of the respondents, and their appearance through the learned Assistant Government Advocate on January 12, 1994 no return to the writ petition has been filed though more than two years have passed. In such a sorry state of affairs this Court was left with no option but to decide the matter on the basis of averments made in the writ petition. 2. The petitioner was granted a licence of a deed-writer vide order dated August 17, 1963 (Annexure-1) and the licence was renewed from time to time. 3. Thereafter, vide order dated December 1, 1987 the licence of the petitioner was suspended but the suspension order was revoked on representation made by him, vide order dated February 15, 1990. The petitioner was then informed vide order/letter dated January 10, 1992 about cancellation of his licence on the ground that an enquiry was made and charges were found to be proved against him. The revision filed by the petitioner was also dismissed vide order dated August 17, 1992. After having availed alternative remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that the orders dated January 10, 1992 and August 17, 1992 be quashed and set aside. 4. Two fold submissions were made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The first submission is that in the alleged inquiry the petitioner was never associated, as no notice of the inquiry was given to him. The second submission is that before cancelling licence no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner by the authority concerned and the cancellation of licence is in contravention of rule 11(2) of the Rajasthan Registration (Licensing of Document Writers) Rules, 1956 hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). Rule 11 (2) of the Rules reads as under : "No licence shall be cancelled without giving the document writer a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the proposed cancellation." 5. Rule 11 (2) of the Rules reads as under : "No licence shall be cancelled without giving the document writer a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the proposed cancellation." 5. The petitioner's assertion is not controverted by the respondents by filing any return that he was not given any opportunity of hearing and there is no reason to disbelieve it, specially when from the documents on record, it does not appear that any show cause notice was given to him before cancelling his licence. 6. The petition, therefore, deserves to be allowed on the simple ground that the order cancelling the licence of the petitioner as deed-writer has been made in contravention of rule 11(2) of the Rules, as he was not given any opportunity of showing cause against the proposed cancellation. Otherwise also, the order is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order cancelling the licence of the petitioner as a deed writer is, hereby, set aside. The petitioner shall also be entitled to get costs of this litigation which is quantified as Rs. 1,000/-. A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan for taking disciplinary action against the erring officers for not filing the reply of the writ petition for such a long time.Petition allowed with costs. *******