JUDGMENT : DEVASHIS BARUAH, J. Heard Mr. A.M. Khan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the cancellation of the lease granted to the petitioner vide the order dated 04.08.2025. 3. The case of the petitioner herein is that the Respondent Authorities, while issuing the impugned order dated 04.08.2025, relied upon certain grounds which were not the subject matter of the show cause notice, and as such, the impugned order dated 04.08.2025 is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 4. The materials on record show that the petitioner herein was issued a settlement order of Larkuchi-Kalachar-Majorchar Ferry Service for the period, i.e. the remaining period of 2024-25 w.e.f. the date of taking over by the lessee upto 31.03.2026. It is also relevant to observe that pursuant thereto, an agreement was entered into which was w.e.f. 01.04.2025 to 31.03.2026 at a total consideration of Rs.10,05,000/-. 5. On 19th of June 2025, an incident happened at the Larkuchi- Kalachar-Majorchar Ferry Route which resulted in fatal consequences. On the same date, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the Director, Inland Water Transport, Assam alleging various violations. The petitioner, upon receipt of the said show cause notice, submitted a reply on 20.06.2025. There was no decision taken by the Respondent Authorities immediately thereupon, and as such, the petitioner requested for resumption of operation of the ferry service by the communication dated 07.07.2025. The petitioner thereupon was informed by the communication dated 02.08.2025 that the reasons assigned in the reply to the show cause notice were not found satisfactory and steps were being taken for the purpose of cancellation of the said lease due to dereliction of duty and failure to maintain safety standards. Subsequent thereto, on 04.08.2025, the impugned order was passed, and it is under such circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed. 6. The record reveals that this Court vide an order dated 22.08.2025, issued notice. Pursuant thereto, an affidavit-in-opposition was filed wherein the Respondent Authorities duly supported the impugned order. A perusal of the said affidavit-in-opposition shows that pursuant to the show cause notice which was issued on 19.06.2025, an enquiry was conducted by the District Magistrate, Nalbari. 6. The record reveals that this Court vide an order dated 22.08.2025, issued notice. Pursuant thereto, an affidavit-in-opposition was filed wherein the Respondent Authorities duly supported the impugned order. A perusal of the said affidavit-in-opposition shows that pursuant to the show cause notice which was issued on 19.06.2025, an enquiry was conducted by the District Magistrate, Nalbari. On the basis of the said enquiry report, it was found that there were various lapses on the part of the petitioner. On the basis of the said lapses and taking into account the terms and conditions of the lease as well as the Proforma Form of Lease power driven major ferries as stipulated in the Control and Management of Ferry Rules, 1968, the petitioner was found to have violated Rules 6, 11 and 14 of the Proforma Lease, and it is under such circumstances, the impugned order dated 04.08.2025 was passed. 7. This Court has duly heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and had also duly taken note of the pleadings and the documents enclosed thereto. 8. It appears from the pleadings, more particularly, the affidavit-in- opposition filed by the Respondent Authorities, that the Respondent Authorities have taken into consideration various aspects of the matter which were not the basis on which the show cause notice was issued. 9. This Court enquired with Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned standing counsel for the Respondent Authorities as to why the basis of cancellation of the lease is different from the allegation made in the show cause notice. The learned Standing Counsel, with all fairness, submitted that the show cause notice was issued on the very date of the incident, and as such, upon making further enquiries, and more particularly on the basis of the enquiry report dated 27.06.2025, it came to light that the petitioner had violated various terms of the lease agreement as well as the extant law. 10. This Court is of the opinion that if there are any materials taken which were not part of the allegations contained in the show cause notice and the materials relied upon; without giving any opportunity to the petitioner to have a say against those materials which are being used against him, any action thereupon taken would be in violation of the principles of natural justice, which is a facet of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution. It is, therefore, the opinion of this Court that as the impugned order dated 04.08.2025 is based upon materials relied upon without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, the same cannot be allowed to be sustained. 11. This Court further finds it pertinent to observe that as this Court have not entered into the merits, but have found that the impugned order is violative of the principle of natural justice, it would be in the interest of justice to permit the Respondent Authorities to issue a fresh show cause notice thereby putting the petitioner to notice as regards the offending materials on the basis of which the Respondent Authorities propose to take any action. 12. While dictating the judgement, Mr. A. M. Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the period of the lease ends on 31.03.2024. The learned counsel therefore submitted that while the Respondents are given the liberty to issue show cause notice, the petitioner who had already paid the amount of the lease may be permitted to run the ferry service till the culmination of the proceedings which the Respondents propose to take against the petitioner. 13. Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Transport Department submitted that the petitioner had resorted to various violations which led to fatal consequences, and as such, no direction in that regard ought to be passed. She further submitted that presently the Transport Department departmentally is running the said ferry service. 14. Taking into account the above submission, this Court enquired with Ms. M. D. Borah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents as to whether the Respondents propose to initiate a fresh proceedings for cancellation. The learned counsel submitted that within 15 days from today, the show cause notice would be issued and depending on the reply submitted, the Respondents shall conclude the proceedings within one month from the date of submission of the reply. Taking into account the above submission, it is the opinion of this Court that it would not be in the interest of justice to allow the petitioner to run the ferry, if the time schedule mentioned is observed with due diligence. 15. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The impugned order dated 04.08.2025 is set aside and quashed. 15. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The impugned order dated 04.08.2025 is set aside and quashed. (ii) Liberty is granted to the Respondent Authorities to initiate fresh proceedings for cancellation of the lease. In the circumstance, such proceedings are initiated, the respondents would be required to issue show case notice to the petitioner providing the materials on which the Respondents would rely upon in such proceedings. (iii) This Court further directs that the show cause notice be issued with 15 days from the date of the present judgement in the circumstances the Respondents take a decision to initiate proceedings for cancellation of the lease. (iv) This Court further directs that within 30 days from the date of furnishing reply by the petitioner, the Respondents shall conclude the proceedings initiated for cancellation and inform the petitioner about the decision so taken. (v) The above time period is mentioned taking into consideration that the lease would expire on 31.03.2023. (vi) In the meantime, till such decision is not taken, the Respondents are given the liberty to run the ferry services departmentally.