The order suspending a licence is invalid if issued without granting an opportunity for a hearing, violating principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order, issued by the second respondent, suspending the drug licence issued to the petitioner.

2. The primary contention raised by the petitioner in taking recourse to the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice. Petitioner has also raised other contentions pointing out the absence of merits of the impugned order as well. Petitioner has also raised a contention that the proviso to Rule 65 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules , 1945 had not been followed.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly submitted that the impugned order has been passed without granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. Since the impugned order has been issued without hearing the petitioner, I am satisfied that the contention raised by the petitioner, on the basis of violation of principles of natural justice, has merits. An order passed without hearing the affected party, can have no legs to stand, in the eye of law.

5. Though the learned counsel raised contentions on the merits of the order and pointed out the untenable findings rendered therein, I am of the view that those are not matters that need to be agitated before this Court at this juncture, in the light of the finding in the preceding paragraphs and they are all left open.

Accordingly, Ext.P3 order is hereby quashed and the second respondent is directed to issue fresh notice to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after granting an opportunity of being heard.

The writ petition is allowed as above.

sd/-