1 WP-7112.sxw ASN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7112 OF 2010 Mr.Vivekanand P. Rai. ..Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Pankaj Kansara, Advocate i/by Kansara & Thanekar, for the Petitioner. Mr. P .P. Kakade, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Coram : A.S.OKA, J. Date : 13th October, 2010 PC: 1 Rule. The learned A.G.P. waives service for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Considering the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petition is taken up forthwith for final hearing. 2 By an order dated 20 th June, 2010, the Executive Magistrate cancelled the licence granted to the petitioner. An appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the State Government. One of the contentions raised in the appeal was that 2 WP-7112.sxw the order of the learned Executive Magistrate is in breach of the principles of natural justice. By an order dated 18th January, 2010, the State Government dismissed the appeal. 3 On 16th September, 2010 when this writ petition came up before this Court, the learned A.G.P. was directed to take instructions on the question whether the petitioner was heard before passing the order dated 20th June, 2009. On 4th October, 2010, the learned A.G.P. expressed inability to make a statement on this aspect and therefore, petition was kept today for final disposal. 4 Today when the petition is called out, the learned A.G.P. appearing for the Respondents, on instructions, states that before passing the order dated 20th June, 2009, the petitioner was not heard. Apart from this statement, even perusal of the order dated 20th June, 2009 indicates that there was no show cause notice issued to the petitioner and no opportunity of being heard was granted to the petitioner. Perusal of the order of the Appellate 3 WP-7112.sxw Authority shows that specific contention regarding the breach of principles of natural justice was raised in appeal. In fact, the Appellate Authority ought to have remanded the matter to enable the Executive Magistrate to give an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Instead of passing the order of remand, the Appellate Authority has gone into merits of the case. 4 A drastic order of cancellation of licence could not have been passed without giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Only on this ground, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5 Hence, I pass the following order. ORDER a) The impugned orders dated 20th June, 2009 and 18th August, 2010 are quashed and set aside. However, it will be open for the concerned authority to issue show cause notice to the petitioner and initiate appropriate 4 WP-7112.sxw proceeding for cancellation of licence. All the contentions of the parties in that behalf are kept open. b) Rule is partly made absolute in the above terms. JUDGE