Cancellation of authorization without notice and opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice. The mere fact that an order was passed under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, confiscating the stock found in the Fair Price Shop is not sufficient to cancel the authorization issued under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Distribution by Card System) Order.

VENKATARAMA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed against the order dt. 19-7-1993 passed by the 1st respondent cancelling the authorisation to run Nehrunagar Fair Price Shop, Yedpaliy. After passing the impugned order, the authorisation to run the shop was granted to the 3rd respondent. The impugned order reads as follows:"in the proceedings cited, orders were passed for confiscation of entire seized stock in favour of Government under Section 6-A of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Therefore, the authorisation and dealership of Sri Md. Saleem, F. P. S. Dealer of nehrunagar village of Yedpaliy Mandal, is hereby cancelled. "

( 2 ) IT appears that proceedings under section 6-A of the Essential Commodities act, 1955 (for short the Act ) were initiated against the petitioner on finding certain irregularities on the inspection of Fair Price shop at Hunsa, of which the petitioner was kept incharge during the year 1991.

( 3 ) EX-FACIE, the impugned order is illegal and unsustainable. The mere fact that an order was passed under section 6-A of the act confiscating the stock found in the Fair price Shop was considered to be sufficient to cancel the authorisation issued under the andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Distribution by Card System) Order. In M/s. Triplex Agencies, Chittoor vs. District collector (1) 1994 (1) Law Summary 41 and in b. Satyanarayana vs. Joint Collector (2) 1994 (1) A. LT. 168, I have held that the proceedings under section 6-A of the Act are quite distinct from the proceedings under the control Order and the mere fact that the action was initiated under section 6-A of the act does not automatically result in suspension or cancellation of the authorisation of the Fair Price Shop. I have taken the view that the Competent Authority exercising the power under the A. P. Scheduled Commodities (Distribution by card System) Order or any other Control order Has to independently apply its mind to the charges against the dealer and take its own decision instead of being led away by the initiation of the proceedings under section 6-A of the E. G. Act. I have also clarified that it is open to the Competent authority, while deciding upon the action to be taken under the Control Order to take into account the relevant material that would have come to light from section 6-A proceedings. The ratio of the said judgments applies with greater force in this case inasmuch as the authorization has been cancelled, but not merely suspended pending enquiry. The 1 st respondent erred in assuming that the final order passed by the Joint Collector in Sec. 6-A proceedings automatically brings about the cancellation of the authorisation and both are inextricably mixed up. Whether or not the authorisation is to be cancelled is 3 matter of independent decision to be taken by the competent Authority exercising the power under the Control Order.

( 4 ) THAT apart, there is another obvious illegality that invalidates the impugned order. In the present case, no show cause notice was issued and no opportunity of making representation was given to the petitioner. Evidently, the order passed by the Joint Collector confiscating the seized stock was deemed sufficient to cancel the authorisation without any further enquiry or hearing to the petitioner. The impugned order is, therefore, violative of the principles of natural justice.

( 5 ) THE learned Government Pleader has contended that there are Government orders to the effect that the authorisation of fair Price Shop could be cancelled without any notice and without any further enquiry if the confiscation of seized stock has been ordered under Section 6-A of the Act. Though time was granted, no such G. O. were placed before me. In any case, the G. Os. which are in the nature of executive instructions, cannot over-ride the statutory Control Orders which contemplate an enquiry before a decision is taken to cancel or suspend the licence unless of course, the suspension is by way of an interim meas

Click Here to Read the rest of this document