Principles of natural justice must be followed, including providing an opportunity to be heard before imposing penalties under the Contract Labour Act.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr.Aditya Davda waives service of notice on behalf of respondent- State. Learned advocate Mr.H.S.Munshaw waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.3.

2. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, as well as under Sections 14 and

15 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 , challenging the orders dated 25.07.2024 and 22.08.2025 passed by Respondent No.1. By these orders, a penalty in the form of licence revocation was imposed for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 14 (1) (b) of the said Act and for failure to file annual returns within the time stipulated by the Authority.

3. The case of the present petitioner is that he is engaged in the business of providing bus services to various transport corporations, including the Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service. A work order was awarded to the petitioner after obtaining a labour licence for the period from 01.06.2023 to 31.05.2028. Pursuant to a notification dated 14.06.2021 issued by the State of Gujarat, the provisions of Rule 82 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Rules, 1972 were amended, mandating the submission of annual returns in Annexure V within the prescribed timeframe. Since the petitioner was granted a licence in the year 2023, he was required to file the return for that year on or before 01.03.2024. The petitioner was obligated to submit the consolidated return through the E-Shram Seva Web Portal, on the website of the Commissioner of Labour (Director). However, due to lack of experience, the petitioner engaged a consultant. Based on the consultant's communication, although attempts were made to upload the return, the same could not be successfully uploaded on the portal. Subsequently, the petitioner received a show-cause notice via email on 15.06.2024, directing him to submit the returns. It is stated that the said notice was issued to all contractors. Thereafter, further show-cause notices were issued to the petitioner—on 03.07.2024, granting a period of five days for compliance; on 09.07.2024, granting two days; and again on 01.07.2024, directing submission within one day. Ultimately, an order dated 25.07.2024 was passed, canceling the petitioner’s licence. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority, which came to be rejected. The present petition challenges the said rejection order before this Court.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Dipak Dave for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr.Aditya Davda for the State.

5. Learned Advocate Mr. Dave submits that, since the consultant engaged by the petitioner was unable to upload the returns on the official website, an attempt was made to submit the returns manually at the office of Respondent No.1. However, the said manual submission was not accepted by the office on the ground that only online submissions were permissible. Learned Advocate Mr. Dave further submits that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner prior to the imposition of a harsh penalty for what was, at the most, a minor procedural lapse in not submitting the returns within the stipulated timeframe. It is submitted that the returns were eventually submitted on 08.08.2024, albeit belatedly. However, the Appellate Authority failed to consider this fact and proceeded to dismiss the appeal without appreciating the bonafide attempts made by the petitioner to comply with the requirement. Learned Advocate Mr. Dave also submits that the petitioner is engaged in the business of supplying buses, and for a minor lapse, a disproportionately severe punishment in the form of licence cancellation has been imposed. Learned Advocate Mr. Dave reli