JUDGMENT

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Aditya Davda, learned AGP for the respondents waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing today.

3. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of section 18(C) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act,1940 and the Rules framed thereunder seeking following reliefs:

“A. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit this Special Civil Application;

B. YOUR LORDSHIPS may further be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, Order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the order No. Appeal 10-2020-1703-Z dated 22/01/2021 passed by respondent no. 1 and the order no. A/R/RADD/THEOS/10243 dated 29/09/2020 passed by respondent no.2 holding ex-facie illegal, malafide, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, perverse, unjust and unreasonable;

C. Or in the alternative YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased quash and set aside order No. Appeal 10-2020-1703-Z dated 22/01/2021 passed by respondent no. 1 and may further be pleased to direct respondent no. 1 to provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the matter and may pass appropriate order within the time frame as thought fit;

D. Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the execution, operation and implementation of the order No. Appeal 10-2020-1703-Z dated 22/01/2021 passed by respondent no.1 and the order no. A/R/RADD/THEOS/10243 dated 29/09/2020 passed by respondent no.2 to meet with the ends of the justice;

E. Any other and further relief as thought fit may kindly be granted.”

4. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the respondent no.2, was pleased to grant wholesale drug selling license in favour of M/s. Theos Pharmaceuticals for 5 years i.e. till 04/09/22. That, respondent no.2 by an order no. A/R/RADD/THEOS/10243, cancelled the license dehors the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the Rules of 1945 vide order dated 29.09.2020. That, the petitioner preferred an Appeal before respondent no.1 against the order of respondent no.2 which came to be dismissed vide order dated 22/01/2021.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned orders dated 29.09.2020 and 22.01.2021 passed by respondents no. 2 and 1 respectively, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

7. Learned counsel Mr. PJ Kanabar, has submitted that the impugned orders passed by the respondent authorities are illegal, unjust, arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to the facts and material on record and the provisions of the Act and therefore, are required to be quashed and set aside. He has submitted that impugned order passed by respondent no. 1 on the face of it a non-speaking order and that the respondent no. 1 has not recorded nor has dealt with the grounds of appeal in any manner whatsoever. He has submitted that the order of cancellation of petitioner's wholesale license and the rejection of the petitioner's appeal are violative of principles of natural justice. He has submitted that since the license has already expired, the petitioner may file a fresh application before the competent authority for seeking license. Over and above the grounds agitated in the memo of petition, learned counsel Mr. PJ Kanabar has urged that the impugned orders passed by the respondent authorities are required to be quashed and set aside and the present petition is required to be allowed.

8. As against that, learned AGP Mr. Davda, appearing for the respondents, has opposed the present petition and submitted that there is no any infirmity or any illegality in the impugned orders passed by the respondent authorities and therefore, no inte