IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 26169 of 2008 Between: M/s.Sai Venkateswara Ex Plosives Rep.by its Proprietor Chinta Venkateswarlu, S/o.Veeraiah 11-120/3 Vidyanagar Opp Indian Gas Godown Kodada Nalgonda District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dy Chief (Controller of Explosives Government of India Ministry of Commerce& Industry (PESO) Kendriya Sadan I Floor Sultan Bazar Koti Hyderabad 2 The Station House Officer P.S Naredcherla Nalgonda District 3 The Superintendent of Police Nalgonda 4 The District Collector Nalgonda District Nalgonda 5 The Chief Controller of Explosives ESO A Block V Floor CGO Complex Seminary Hills Nagpur 6 Paladugu Venkateswara Rao S/o.Veera Raghavaiah Srinagar Colony Kodada Nalgonda District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to set aside the suspension order dt 27-8-2008 passed by the 5th respondent herein vide licence No.E/HO/AP/22/328(E 6608) explosives Magazine at sy No.133 Dawarakunta(V) lave Kodada(M) Nalgonda District as it is illegal arbitrary and in violation of Explosives act and rules and also in violation of principles of natural justice consequently restore the petitioner's licence Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.ARUN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the Suspension Order dated 27.8.2008 passed by the 5th respondent-Chief Controller of Explosives as the same is in violation of Indian Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Indian Explosive Rules, 1884. The petitioner-M/s.Sai Venkateswara Explosives, which is represented by its Proprietor, asserts that he is a valid licence holder bearing No.E/HQ/AP/22/328(E6608), dated 9.5.2007 issued by the 1st respondent-Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives which is valid upto 31.3.2009 and is authorized to conduct blasting operations using explosives. He entered into an agreement with Sai Venkateswara Krishna Stone Crusher, Dorakunta village, to do blasting operations in Mines Quarry for that company and is working as such. While so, when the petitioner and the 6th respondent were transporting the Explosives by two Autos for blasting purposes, the 2nd respondent-Station House Officer stopped the Autos, checked them and found some explosives, and based on their statements, he registered Cr.No.113 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 336 and 286 IPC, Section 5 of Indian Explosives Substances Act, 1908 and Sections 5 and 9 of Indian Explosives Act, 1884 alleging that the 6th respondent purchased the explosives from the petitioner, and arrested them on 10.10.2007 and seized the material. Then the 3rd respondent-Superintendent of Police, wrote a letter to the 4th respondent-District Collector alleging that the petitioner violated the rules laid down in 9(B) of Explosives Act and requested him to cancel the petitioner’s licence. In pursuance of that letter, the 4th respondent recommended cancellation of the petitioner’s licence to the 5th respondent. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that based on the letter of recommendation for cancellation of his licence, the 5th respondent, by his order dated 27.8.2008, suspended the petitioner’s licence by calling upon him to show cause as to why the licence granted in his favour should not be cancelled. Further, the petitioner states that though he submitted a detailed explanation, dated 11.9.2008, the official respondents have not passed any orders thereon. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. As the petitioner has already submitted his explanation dated 11.9.2008, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following direction: “The 5th respondent-Chief Controller of Explosives is hereby directed to consider the explanation dated 11.9.2008 offered by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________ 01.12.2008 bcj