- (1.) SHYAMAL Kumar Sen, C. J. Heard learned counsel for writ petitioner and standing counsel for respondents.
(2.) IN the instant writ petition the petitioner who is a dealer in kerosene oil has challenged the cancellation order dated 4-12-2000, whereby the licence of the petitioner was cancelled. It is the contention of the writ petitioner that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. That apart the petitioner was not supplied with the copy of inquiry report conducted by Sub-Divisional Magistrate dated 1-11-2000, upon which reliance was placed in the impugned order and that itself violates principles of natural justice. It appears to us from the impugned order itself that the concerned authority has taken into con sideration the inquiry report of Sub-Divisional Magistrate dated 1-11-2000 but no copy of the same has been supplied to the writ petitioner which is essential re quirement for following the principle of natural justice. It is well settled that when report of the inquiry has been relied upon by the disciplinary authority, that report has to be furnished to the person who is effected by the same. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the im pugned order suffers from the violation of the Principle of Natural Justice. It has been argued on behalf of the respondents that there is a provision for statutory appeal. It is well settled that if there is violation of natural justice, alter native remedy shall not stand as a bar and in that view of the matter we are of the view that the case of Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar, Trade Marks, Mumbai, 1998 (8) SCC 1, relied upon by petitioner is fully applicable in the facts of present case. The writ petition accordingly succeeds. The impugned order of cancellation dated 4-12-2000 and the consequential order dated 5- 12-2000 stand quashed and set aside. This order shall, however not prevent the respondent authorities to take ap propriate action in accordance with law. Petition allowed. .;