- (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. The petitioner is a dealer of fertilizers and holds a registration certificate to that effect. The District Agricultural Officer inspected the premises of the petitioner on 22nd December, 2012 and took two samples from a stitched bag for analysis of the quality of that fertilizer.
(2.) It transpires that the fertilizers was found to be sub-standard/adulterated and accordingly, a show-cause notice dated 28th January, 2013 was issued by the District Agricultural Officer to show-cause why the licence should not be cancelled as the fertilizer was found to be sub-standard. The petitioner submitted its reply contending that he had no role to play in the quality of the fertilizer and that the fertilizer as imported from abroad three months before and on account of the lapse of time the potency of the fertilizer may have dropped.
(3.) The District Agricultural Officer without considering the aforesaid reply cancelled the dealership of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Director of Agriculture. During the pendency of the appeal, the second sample was also sent for analysis and again a report was submitted indicating that the fertilizer was of a sub-standard quality. The appeal was accordingly rejected. The petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present writ petition.;