PURNIMA PANDEY Vs. CHIEF MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 30.10.2002, Annexure -1 to the writ petition cancelling her licence to run a canteen in S.S.P.G. Hospital, Varanast and a public call office (P.C.O.) within the premises of Rajkiya Mahila Chikitsalaya, Varanasi.

(3.) IT is alleged in paragraph 14 of the writ petition that the local M.L.A. wanted to get allotted the said premises for his own man and hence he made a complaint dated 27.10.2002 against the petitioner. It is alleged in paragraph 15 of the writ petition that on the basis of the said complaint without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order dated 30.10.2002 was passed cancelling the licences for both the canteen as well as the P.C.O.