Judgment :- K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. Petitioner is an authorised ration dealer of shop No. 217 of Harippad Taluk. His dealership was cancelled by the second respondent by Ext. P1 order dated 21.5.1999. Cancellation was effected under Clause 45(8) of the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966. Order refers to a report of the Rationing Inspector, Karuvatta dated 20.5.1999. Report pointed out misappropriation of 4047 litres of kerosene by writing 5 litres of kerosene in the records of RCS and also unauthorised sales, however, was made to the misappropriation of 132.500 Kgs. rice by writing in the Nalvazhy but not issued to card holders by entering into the ration cards. Various other infirmities were also pointed out. 2. Counsel for petitioner submitted that before taking drastic steps for cancellation of ARD no notice was given to the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader submitted that as per clause 45(8) of the Rationing Order the authority has got the power to suspend the appointment of the Authorised Retail Distributor temporarily pending enquiry if the authority is satisfied and it is considered necessary to do so without notice. The relevant clause is extracted below: "If the District Collector or any officer of the Civil Supplies Department not below the rank of a Taluk Supply Officer finds that the authorised retail distributor has contravened any of the provisions of this Order, or any of the directions issued thereunder or on receipt of a report from any of the officers referred to in sub-clause (7) or on his own inspection of the stocks and accounts in a shop finds any shortage or excess in the quantity, of rationed articles or any irregularities in the accounts or detects noncompliance with any of the direction issued by the competent authorities or contravention of the provisions of any order issued by any competent authority under S.3 of the Essential Commodities Act (Central Act 10 of 1955) which is for the rime being enforced, he may after giving the authorised retail distributor any opportunity of stating his case and for reasons to be recorded in writing amend, vary, suspend or cancel his appointment and/or order forfeiture of the whole or any part of the amount deposited by the authorised retail distributor as security under sub-clause (5). Notwithstanding anything contained in this sub-clause he may order the realisation of an amount equivalent in value to the cost of the quantity of rationed articles found to be short or in excess and the cost of any quantity of rationed articles misappropriated by falsification of accounts and all sums collected in excess by way of transport charges, handling charges, profit, etc. and gained by the authorised retail distributor due to incorrect fixation of price or any other defect in calculation when the mistake subsequently detected at the time of inspection. If considered necessary he may suspend the appointment of the authorised retail distributor temporarily pending enquiry." First part of the clause says that if the District Collector or any officer of the Civil Supplies Department not below the rank of a Taluk Supply Officer, finds that the authorised retail distributor has contravened any of the provisions of the Order or any of the directions issued thereunder he may after giving the authorised retail distributor an opportunity of stating his case and for reasons to be recorded in writing amend, vary, suspend or cancel his appointment and take other measures for forfeiture of whole or any part of the amount deposited by the authorised retail distributor. It is therefore, evident from the above mentioned first part of clause 45(8) that the District Collector or any Officer of the Civil Supplies Department now below the rank of Taluk Supply Officer has to give notice to the authorised retail distributor to state his case before amending, varying, suspending or cancelling his appointment The Authority has to record reasons while passing orders for amending, varying, suspending or cancelling the appointment. 3, Learned Government Pleader submitted that due to the non-obstinate clause, the authority has got the power to temporarily suspend the appointment pending enquiry without notice. Non-obstinate clause evidently refers to sub-clause (8) of clause 45 with regard to realisation of amount equivalent in value to the cost of the quantity of rationed articles misappropriated by falsification of accounts. We are to read the last sentence of sub-clause (8) of Clause 45 with the non-obstinate clause, which would be as follows: "Notwithstanding anything contained in this sub-clause, if considered necessary he may suspend the appointment of the authorised retail distributor temporarily pending enquiry." Non-obstinate clause, therefore, evidently takes away the notice and an opportunity to the authorised retail distributor. We are to read the last sentence of sub-clause (8) of Clause 45 with the non-obstinate clause, which would be as follows: "Notwithstanding anything contained in this sub-clause, if considered necessary he may suspend the appointment of the authorised retail distributor temporarily pending enquiry." Non-obstinate clause, therefore, evidently takes away the notice and an opportunity to the authorised retail distributor. In this case, authorised retail distributor is dealing in essential commodities. Therefore, there may be emergent situations when the authorities cannot wait by issuing notice and then record reasons. It is under such circumstances, I am of the view, authorities have got the power to suspend the appointment of the authorised retail distributor temporarily pending enquiry. At the same time, notice will have to be given to the authorised retail distributor before passing final orders. However, for keeping the licence under suspension no prior notice is necessary due to non-obstinate clause. 4. Viewed in that angle, I do not find any infirmity in the order impugned. Respondents would complete the enquiry within two months, after giving notice and an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Original Petition is disposed of as above.