DALCHAND CHITTAR MAL Vs. COMMR FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by a firm Messrs Dalchand Chittar Mal of Aligarh for the issue of writs and directions under Article 326 of the Constitution for quashing the order passed by the opposite parties cancelling the petitioners' appointment as District Importer at Aligarh and for directing the opposite parties to grant to the petitioners all permits and facilities to which they are entitled under the license in form B, issued under the U. P. Controlled Cotton, Cloth and Yarn Dealers' Licensing Order, 1948. It is the admitted case of both the parties that the petitioners were holders of a license in form B, issued by the District Magistrate of Aligarh in their favour. The petitioners alleged that they had some differences with one Shri P. C. Sharma, Secretary, City Congress Committee, Hathras and influenced by Shri P. C. Sharma the opposite parties had passed an order terminating the petitioners' appointment as Importer for Aligarh District. This cancellation amounted to a cancel-lation of the license issued in form B and was against the provisions of the U. P. Controlled Cotton & Yarn Dealers' Licensing Order, 1948, because the order was passed without recording the reasons for passing it in writing as required by the aforesaid Order. These facts, which were given on behalf of the petitioners in an affidavit, have not been controverted by the opposite parties at all, and we have, therefore, to accept them as correct. We must, therefore, proceed on the finding that the petitioners were holders of a license in form B and that suddenly and without any warning the petitioners were informed by opposite party no. 3 on 17-6-1961 that the Government had been pleased to terminate their appointment as individual importer for ex-U. P. goods for district Aligarh with immediate effect. When this information was received by the petitioners, they made a representation to the Government. In reply to this representation, the petitioners received an intimation from the Commissioner Food & Civil Supplies, U. P. Government, stating, "with reference to their application dated 31-5-1961, regarding Cloth importership Messrs Dalchand Ohittar-mal are hereby informed that the Government have deemed it desirable to terminate their appointment as cloth importer." It has been alleged by the petitioners that as a result of these orders of the Government, the petitioners cannot be granted permits under which they could receive their quota of cloth, although they still hold a license valid up to the 30th September, 1951, which had not been expressly cancelled. It is contended that an order of cancellation of a license is a quasi-judicial order and is open to scrutiny by this Court when exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution. In this particular case the opposite parties passed the order cancelling the appointment without complying with the provisions of Clause 12 of the U. P. Controlled Cotton, Cloth & Yarn Dealers' Licensing Order, 1948, and therefore, it should be quashed so that the petitioners may be able to exercise their right under the valid license which had been issued to them.

(2.) The learned counsel for the opposite parties has contended that the order communicated to the petitioners on the 17th May, 1961, was not a quasi-judicial order at all but an executive order terminating the appointment of the petitioners as individual importer. This order did not purport to cancel the license issued in form B, and cannot, therefore, be deemed to be an order under Clause 12 of the Licensing Order mentioned above. This argument has not found favour with us at all. The method of appointment of a District Importer is not laid down anywhere in the various orders dealing with controlled cotton, cloth and yarn except that there is a mention of the capacity as a district importer informs itself. The Form B is entitled :

(3.) In addition to the prayer for quashing this order there is another prayer by the petitioners for a direction to the opposite parties to grant to the petitioners permits and facilities to which they are entitled under the license in form B. In the affidavit before us, it has not been disclosed that the opposite parties have in any way refused any permits or facilities to the petitioners to which they are entitled. After the illegal order terminating the appointment of the petitioners as importer, which has the effect of the cancellation of the license, is set aside, it is obvious that the petitioner would be entitled to exercise all their rights in the license and ask for permits and facilities to which they are entitled and which we need not investigate. No further directions, therefore, appear to be necessary, except an order quashing the termination of the appointment of the petitioners as district importer. We, therefore, quash the order of the Government by which the appointment of the petitioners as individual importer ex- U.P. goods for Aligarh was terminated and which was communicated to the petitioners by opposite party No. 3 on the 11th May, 1951. Since the main prayer of the petitioners is being allowed, they will be entitled to their costs from the opposite parties which we fix at Rs. 200.