Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 107 (ORI)

Gobinda Chandra Sahoo v. State of Orissa

2008-02-06

I.MAHANTY

body2008
ORDER 06.02.2008 — Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was a PDS licensee and was served with a show cause notice on 24.1.2008 under Annexure-2 and simultaneously, on the self-same day an order was passed suspending the licence of the petitioner. He submits that Clause-10 of the Orissa PDS (Control) Order, 2002 provides that the Licensing Authority may cancel or suspend the licence by an order in writing, but the said clause also provides that no order shall be made under this clause unless the licensee has been given a reasonable opportunity of stating his case against the proposed cancellation or suspension. Mr. Das, learned Addl. Government Advocate submits that exigency of the circumstance so necessitated for passing the order of suspension after issuance of the show cause notice. He further submits that individual interest can be waived for public interest and therefore, no interference in the impugned order is called for since the same is appealable under Clause 14(2) of the Control Order, 2002. According to him, the petitioner has also filed his response to the show cause notice and therefore, it may be left to the authority to decide the outcome of the said pro¬ceeding. Considering the submissions advanced and in view of the clear and categorical stipulations under the proviso to Clause-10 of the Control Order, 2002 which clearly mandates that no order including the order of suspension shall be made unless the licensee is given reasonable opportunity for stating his case against the proposed cancellation or suspension. In the present case at hand, it is clear that though show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 24.1.2008, the licence of the petitioner has been suspended with immediate effect. It is also a fact that the petitioner has already given his reply to the show cause notice on 28.1.2008 under Annexure-4. In view of the above narration of facts and law, the impugned order under Annexure-3 suspending the licence of the petitioner with immediate effect suffers from clear infraction of law and therefore, the same is quashed. Since the petitioner has already filed his reply to the show cause notice, it is open to the authorities to consider and take appropriate decision on the show cause notice issued to the petitioner. The writ application is, accordingly, allowed. Application allowed.