The cancellation of a Letter of Authorization under the Fertilizer Control Order requires substantiated evidence, and disregarding laboratory test results violates procedural fairness and relevant legal provisions.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Mishra, J.

1. The Writ Petition has been preferred for quashing of the order of cancellation dated 29.09.2022(Annexure-8) of the Letter of Authorization, shortly, ‘LoA’, of Petitioner’s Firm so also proceedings of the Appeal dated 09.12.2022 (Annexure-10), vide which the said cancellation order dated 29.09.2022 was confirmed by Appellate Authority (O.P.3), with further prayer to restore the LoA of the Petitioner firm.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that the Petitioner firm namely, M/s. Glare Chemicals India, is a proprietorship situated at Biragobindapur, Sakhigopal, Puri. The said firm, being an authorized licensee/ dealer, is engaged in the process of manufacturing organic fertilizers in its own unit and supplies the same as a State Dealer of organic fertilizers since last sixteen years. The Petitioner’s unit has also been duly issued with Memorandum of Acknowledgement, shortly, “MOA”, by the Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment, Odisha (O.P.1) as per provisions under Fertilizer (Inorganic, Organic or Mixed) Control Order, 1985, shortly, “Control Order, 1985”, having valid ISO Certificate vide Annexure 1 & 2. The Petitioner’s firm has been producing and supplying Bio and Organic Fertilizers to the Government Departments under valid process for about one and half decades without any complaint from any quarter till date and except supplying to the Govt. departments through tender process, the Petitioner firm does not make any retail sale of the fertilizers.

On 11.09.2022, the Assistant Agriculture Officer, acting as Fertilizer Inspector, along with Tahsildar, Satyabadi and Police, came to the unit of the Petitioner and collected two samples each of Vermi Compost and raw materials for Vermi Compost and one sample of Bio Fertilizer for testing purpose, which was the left-over stock from the previous year’s supply orders of Bio fertilizer, kept in the premises for disposal and not for supply. Thereafter, the entire premises, consisting of the factory, laboratory, godown, workers’ quarters and two trucks used for transportation, being inside the premises, was sealed.

3. The action of sealing the premises was challenged in W.P. (C) No.24100 of 2022, which was disposed of by quashing the order of sealing of the unit, such action of the authority being arbitrary and in contravention of the Control Order, 1985 so also directing for opening of the seal. Further, an F.I.R against the Petitioner was also lodged by the B.A.O, which was challenged in CRLMC No.4082 of 2022 and interim stay of the GR Case has been granted by this Court.

On 15.09.2022, the Notified Authority-Cum-Joint Director of Agriculture (O.P.2) issued an order suspending the LoA of the Petitioner firm and communicated the same through e-mail due to alleged attempt by the Petitioner to contravene clause 19(a)/19(c) of the Control Order, 1985. On 27.09.2022, a letter was issued to the Petitioner through e-mail for personal hearing, in terms of Clause 31 of the Control Order, 1985. Though the Petitioner appeared and filed his written statement regarding suspension of his LoA without any basis or test report of the samples, the Opposite Party No.2 cancelled the LoA of the Petitioner’s Firm vide order dated 29.09.2022, which was challenged by the Petitioner by preferring an appeal under clause 32 of the Control Order, 1985 before the Addl. Director of Agriculture (Extension)-Cum-Appellate Authority (O.P.3).

The said Appeal was disposed of by the Opposite Party No.3 vide order dated 09.12.2022 upholding the order of cancellation of LoA dat