RAVISHANKAR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he is a stamp vendor having licence under the Uttar Pradesh Stamp Rules, 1942 (the Rules, 1942). By the impugned order dated 20.03.2020, the licence of the petitioner being licence no. 176 has been cancelled by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Muzaffar Nagar on the ground that a complaint has been made by Tehsil Bar Association against the petitioner for misbehaviour.

(3.) The petitioner duly holds a stamp vendor licence granted under the Rules, 1942, which, as per his claim, has been renewed from time to time. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order cancelling the petitioner's licence has been passed only on the basis of a complaint without any proper enquiry and an opportunity to the petitioner to submit his version. It has been submitted that the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the show cause notice has not been considered by the licensing authority while passing the impugned order.