GULAMNABI RASULBHAI VOHRA Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is preferred by the petitioner against the order, dated 30.6.2000 passed by the Deputy Collector, Nadiad whereby the licence of stamp vendor is cancelled.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the petitioner was holding the licence of stamp vendor and bond writer. It is the case of the petitioner that he is holding the licence since 1976. The case of the petitioner is that the licence is required to be renewed every year and for the year 1997, i.e. from 1.1.1997 to 31.12.1997 he had applied for renewal of licence. However, the petitioner has stated that on 8.1.1998 he was communicated by the office of the Deputy Collector that his licence for the period 1.1.1997 to 31.12.1997 is renewed. It is the case of the petitioner that the decision was taken for renewal on 28.8.1997, but however he was communicated about the same on 8.1.1998. The case of the petitioner is that as the licence was not renewed or that since the renewal was not communicated to him he could not sell the stamps in the absence of specific communication regarding a valid renewed licence.

(3.) However, it appears that on 11.1.1999 an order came to be passed by the Deputy Collector, Nadiad for cancellation of the licence of the petitioner on the ground that for the year 1997-98 the petitioner did not sell the stamps. The aforesaid order came to be passed by the Deputy Collector inspite of the request made by the son of the petitioner for adjournment and therefore the petitioner had preferred the Special Civil Application No.1794/99 before this Court. In the said petition ultimately on 6.3.2000 this court (Coram: C.K.Thakker,J as His Lordship then was) allowed the petition by quashing the order dated 11.1.1999 passed by the Deputy Collector and remanded the matter by directing for rehearing of the matter afresh. Thereafter, the matter was once again taken up for hearing by the Deputy Collector and so far as the period from 1.1.1997 to 31.12.1997 is concerned, the Deputy Collector proceeded on the basis that the licence was renewed on 27.8.97 and so far as the period from 1.1.1998 to 31.12.1998 is concerned the Deputy Collector proceeded on the basis that the licence was renewed on 2.7.98. Therefore, it was found by him that since the stamps were not purchased and sold there is breach of Rules 3 and 9 of the Stamp Supplies and Sales Rules, 1987 and therefore the licence was cancelled as per the order dated 30.6.2000. It is this order which is under challenge in this petition.