RAMESAN V.C. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is filed challenging the decision of the learned single Judge in a writ petition. The appellant pleaded that he is a proprietor of an agency of M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, which supplies cooking gas in cylinders. His request before the learned single Judge was for a direction to the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives to consider his application for renewal of the licence. Private respondents 4 to 8 got impleaded, at their instance, pleading that the land in question has been transferred by the appellant to them. The learned single Judge noted that there was an earlier round of litigation, at the instance of the additional respondents, to which the appellant before us was a party and that there was a direction therein to the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives to consider certain matters, which are referred to in the judgment in WP(C) No. 29671 of 2012. The learned single Judge was of the view that the writ petitioner had suppressed those relevant and material facts and that there were litigations pending before civil court between the parties, and therefore, the writ jurisdiction was not conducive to be invoked.

(2.) WE are now told that the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives is in the process of concluding the proceedings, following the directions issued by this Court in WP(C) No. 29671 of 2012. That being so, the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, who is the jurisdictional authority to decide on the application for renewal of licence, can decide on that also, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to necessary parties. As already noted, private respondents stand to say that the land in question was transferred to them and they do not give consent to the appellant continuing to use it for the purpose of the activities of the agency. We also record the submission that show cause notice has been issued to the appellant for termination of the licence. We, therefore, direct that the Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives will decide on all issues pending before it, following judgment in WP(C) No. 29671 of 2012. Let such decisions be taken after affording necessary opportunity to the parties in relation to all the aforesaid matters, unless such opportunity of hearing has already been given. Let such decision be taken and communicated to the parties within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.