NATVARLAL AMBALAL THAKORE Vs. STATE OF BOMBAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are four special civil applications which raise common questions, and in order to understand the questions, it will be necessary to set out briefly the facts giving rise to each of the four applications.

(2.) IN special civil application No. 1510 of 1955, the applicant is one Natvarlal Ambalal Thakore who owns a shop at Baroda and carries on business in provisions and drugs in the name and style of'Ashwin Medical Stores.' The applicant was carrying on business in drugs under a licence issued to him by a licencing authority, who is the Civil Surgeon of Baroda, upon an application made on December 25, 1952. The licence was valid for a period of two years and on December 21, 1954, he made an application in Form 19A for a licence in Form 20A. The licencing authority viz. the Civil Surgeon, Baroda, refused the licence and communicated his decision to him by a letter dated July 2, 1955. On July 22,1955, the applicant wrote a letter to the Civil Surgeon and Licencing Authority, Baroda, saying that he was surprised and disappointed to receive the letter of July 2, 1955, and that as the communication of July 2, 1955, did not disclose any reason whatsoever for not issuing the required licence, he was not bound by the refusal to issue to him the required licence. As a result of the refusal, the applicant has made this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on July 26, 1955, and his principal contention is that Rule 62A under which the licencing authority has acted is ultra vires the Constitution of India.

(3.) IN special civil application No. 1512 of 1955, the applicant is one Rasiklal and he does business also at Baroda in provisions, and with a view to deal in drugs and other medicinal preparations he applied in Form 19A for a licence in Form 20A on a date which is not apparent from the record. The licencing authority viz. the Civil Surgeon of Baroda, refused his application and communicated to him his decision by a letter dated July 2, 1955. The applicant wrote to the Civil Surgeon a letter dated July 22, 1955, in terms similar to the letter written by the applicant Natvarlal. The applicant Rasiklal has now applied under Article 226 of the Constitution, and his principal contention is that Rule 62A under which the the Civil Surgeon, Baroda, has acted is ultra vires the Constitution of India.