M/S. AMOLAKCHAND MURLIDHAR Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner who is a registered partnership firm carries on business at Sibsagar. They were appointed as an 'Iron and Steel' dealer under the Government of Assam in the your 1942 and continued as such up to the year 1958. They Were appointed as a distributing agent for cement for the sub -division of Sibsagar by the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Supply Department by his letter No. SDB. 90/59/129 dated the 15th May 1959. The Petitioners obtained a licence from the Director of Consumer Goods, Assam to deal with cement at Sibsagar which was renewable every year on payment of the prescribed fee. The Petitioners deposited the prescribed fee and a license dated 12 -6 -59 was issued to them in the prescribed form A under the Assam cement Control and Distribution Order, 1953 (hereinafter called the 1953 Order'). By a letter dated the 18th March 1961 the Director of Consumer Goods, Assam Shillong who is arrayed as opposite party No. 3 in this petition, cancelled the distributing agency for cement of the Petitioners and also the license dated the 12th June 1959. This Petitioners thereafter filed an appeal to the State Government against the aforesaid order as provided under Clause 15 of the 1953 Order The appeal was rejected by an order dated the 6th July 1961 issued under the signature of the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Supply Department. The two orders have been challenged by the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) THE contention of the Petitioners is that their license was cancelled without giving them a reasonable opportunity to show cause and as the cancellation of the license affects fundamental right to carry on business the cancellation order is violative of their fundamental right guaranteed under Article 9(1)(g) of the Constitution. It is further contented that as the right of the Petitioners was affected the principles of natural justice demanded that they should have been given a reasonable opportunity before they were actually condemned.

(3.) THE relevant portion of the order dated 18 -3 -61 issued by the Director of Consumer Goods, Assam reads as follows: