1. This court ordered notice before admission on 12-10-2007. Counter affidavit is filed.

2. M/s. Sri Sai Agrictech, represented by its proprietor, filed the present writ petition for a writ of Mandamus to declare the Proceedings No. SR Cell (1) 264/2007, dated 04.07.2007 of the second respondent and as confirmed by the first respondent in proceedings dated 18.08.2007, as being illegal, irregular, unreasonable, arbitrary exercise of powers in gross violation of principles of natural justice apart from being contrary to the provisions of the Seeds Act, 1966 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Seeds Act') and the Seeds (Control) Order, 1983 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Control Order') and consequently, set aside the same with a further direction to the respondents to restore the licence and renew the same and pass such other orders.

3. Sri S.V.Bhatt, the learned counsel representing the writ petitioner, had taken this court through the affidavit and the counter affidavit and also the relevant clauses of the Control Order and would submit that in view of the facts and circumstances, it is clear that an opportunity of being heard as specified under clause 15 of the Control Order had not been complied with. It would be appropriate to set-aside these orders and give an opportunity to the petitioner to make an application in accordance with law and let the competent authority consider such application not being influenced by the observation, if any made already, in the proceedings in question. The learned counsel had drawn the attention of this court to the relevant clauses of the Control Order and also the relevant provisions of the Seeds Act.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader for Agriculture had taken this court through the contents of the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent and would maintain that in the light of the reasons recorded, this is not a fit case to be interfered with by a writ court. The learned Government Pleader also would maintain that virtually what had been prayed is a writ of certiorari though in the relief column it was specified as a writ of Mandamus and in the light of the facts and circumstances, this is not a fit case where the certiorari jurisdiction to be exercised.

5. Heard the counsel and perused the material placed before this court.

6. It is averred that the petitioner is an agricultural graduate and ventured to start self employment and therefore, started a seeds business in the name and style as M/s. Sri Sai Agritech, plot No.254, Shop No.1, Sri Venkateshwara Nilayam, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar. The petitioner obtained a licence from the competent authority-second respondent i.e. the licence to carry on the business of the dealer in seeds vide licence bearing No.83 dated 26.06.2001. As per the licence, the sale premises is Plot No.254, Shop No.1, Sri Venkateswara Nilayam, Bhagiratha Colony, Mahabubnagar. The processing, packing and storage premises for the business is Door No.1-133, Amistapur Village, Bhoothpur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

7. It is also stated that the Control Order was issued by the Central Government under the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The said Order came into force on 30.12.1983. Clause 3 of the Control Order deals with the dealer to obtain licence and no person shall carry on the business of selling, exporting or importing seeds at any place except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the licence granted to him. Clause 6 of the Control Order prescribes that the validity of licence is for a period of three years from the date of its issue and clause 7 of the Control Order deals with the renewal of licence. Form-'A' is a form of application to obtain dealers' licence and this form is under clause 4 of the Control Order. Form-'B' deals with the terms and conditions of licence. Form-'C' deals with the renewal of licence under clause 7 of the Control Order.

8. It is