SUNDER DUMANNA SHETTY Vs. K D BILLIMORIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sunder Dumanna Shetty, the petitioner herein, is the proprietor of an eating house and restaurant named Shauti Bhuvan Hindu Hotel, situate at Clark Road, Jacob Cirefe, Bombay, herein-after referred to as "the hotel". A licence had been issued to the petitioner under the provisions of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, being licence No. 970/EHL 1954-55 in respect of the said hotel. The said licence was renewed from time to time upto 31st March 1957. On 28th February 1957 the petitioner made an application for the renewal of the said licence for the year 1957-58. On 2nd August 1957 the Commissioner of Police, Bombay, issued a notice against the petitioner, stating that for the reasons set out in the said notice the Commissioner of Police proposed not to renew the said licence in favour of the petitioner and called upon the petitioner to show cause why such action would not be taken. The petitioner was required to appear before the Commissioner of Police on 9th August 1957 for that purpose. In response to the said notice, the petitioner appeared before the Commissioner of Police on 9th August 1957 and urged that the reasons on which the Commissioner of Police proposed to act as aforesaid were without foundation and entirely baseless. On 2nd September 1957 the Commissioner of Police passed an order rejecting the application for renewal of the said licence on the ground that the petitioner was not a suitable person to hold such a licence. On 4th September 1957 the Commissioner of Police addressed a letter to the petitioner, stating that he had refused to renew the licence and enclosed a copy of the said order.

(2.) The petitioner challenges the validity of the said order and has filed the petition herein for the issue of a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and/or directing the respondents or any of them to withdraw and cancel the said order dated the 2nd September 1957 and further directing the respondents or any of them to renew the licence in respect of the said hotel, or in the alternative, directing and/or compelling the Commissioner of Police to withdraw the said order dated 2nd September 1957 and to proceed to hear and determine the petitioner's application for renewal of the licence in accordance with law.

(3.) The impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner of Police in exercise of the powers vested in him under Rule 13-A (4) of the rules framed under the provisions of section 33 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The said rule provides as under:--