MAHALAXMI TRADERS Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KHAMMAM DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner questions the order in proceedings No. A/183/94 dated 12-9-1994 of the 2nd respondent herein and seeks a Writ of Certiorari quashing the same. By the said order, the licence of the petitioner bearing CR (Retail) No. 1/93-94 dated 24-8-93 under the Fertiliser (Control) Order, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Order') was cancelled on the ground that the petitioner contravened Clauses 4, 5, 8, 19(a) and (c) and 35 of the Order. The order reads as follows: -

(2.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner was served with a show cause notice bearing No. A/183/94 dated 8-9-1994 stating that it was found that the petitioner committed the following irregularities: -

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order dated 12-9-1994 cancelling the petitioner's licence is bad on the ground that no personal hearing was given to the petitioner before the said order was made. He submits that the first proviso to sub-clause (2) of Clause 31 of the Order requires a hearing to be given to the petitioner before licence is cancelled and that hearing in that context would mean personal hearing. He relies on the order of D. Reddeppa Reddi, J., in M. Eswaraiah vs. Commissioner and Director of Agriculture (1) Order in W.P.No. 1340 of 1993 Dt. 16-2-1993 wherein the learned Judge dealt with sub-clause (1) of Clause 31 which, so far as it is relevant, is as follows: -