RAKESH SINGH NEGI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE licence issued to the appellant was cancelled. So as to assail the order by which he was required to file a reply to the show cause notice, as also, the order by which the licence issued to him was cancelled, he approached this Court by filing Writ Petition (MS) No. 887 of 2010. A learned Single Judge of this Court declined to entertain the aforesaid Writ Petition by an order dated 10.06.2010 on the ground, that the petitioner ought to have availed of the remedy of a statutory Appeal, which was available to him under Clause (14) of the Government Order dated 15.10.2005 (Annexure-9 with the Writ Petition).

(2.) BEFORE this Court, the solitary contention advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant was, that the appellant assailed the impugned order of cancellation of his licence on account of non-observation of the rules of natural justice. In the circumstances under reference, it is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, that this Court ought not to have relegated the appellant to avail of his appellate remedy. So as to advance the instant contention, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgement rendered by the Apex Court in Committee of Management and another Vs. Vice Chancellor and others (2009) 2 SCC 630. Relying on the observations recorded in paragraph-23 of the aforesaid judgment, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, that the learned Single Judge ought to have adjudicated upon the controversy raised by the appellant on merits. We have perused the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant. For adjudicating upon the present issue canvassed at the hands of the learned counsel for the appellant, we consider it just and appropriate to extract herein paragraphs-22 & 23 of the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant. The same are accordingly reproduced below:-