1 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 568 OF 2011 Shri. Jagannath Dashrath Hire ... Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. ... Respondents Mrs. Bobby Malhotra Paul for the petitioner. Mr. S.N. Bhosale, A.G.P. for Respondent nos. 1 to 4. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : JUNE 27, 2011 P.C. Heard both sides. The petitioner impugns the concurrent orders of cancellation of the licence for public performance (Police Licence). The only submission of Mrs. Malhotra appearing for the petitioner is that for the violations that are attributed to the petitioner, the punishment of cancellation of the licence is too harsh and excessive. She submits that the order passed by the Licensing authority and that of the appellate authority does not disclose that the petitioner is repeated offender or that the activities that have been found to have been conducted at the establishment are attributable to the petitioner. Petitioner has admitted that on account of his ill health he allowed one Mr. Shetty to carry on the business and during the period within which this permission was granted by him, these acts have been committed. Therefore, she submits that bearing in mind that 2 the acts are not attributable to the petitioner and the fact that licence was obtained only in the year 2008, this court should take a lenient view on the aspect of punishment. The learned A.G.P. points out that there are serious violations of the terms and conditions of the licence and the rules. Therefore, the action is justified. Having perused the impugned order, I am of the opinion that in the peculiar facts of this case, the Authority did not hold that the petitioner has repeatedly violated the terms and conditions of the licence or the Acts and rules. Since the licence is recent one and this incident was first of its kind, interest of justice would be served if the ultimate penalty of cancellation of licence is substituted by suspension of the same for a period of thirty days. The petition is allowed in these terms. The period of suspension of thirty days shall commence from 10th July, 2011. Needless to state that once the ultimate order is substituted with that of suspension of the licence for thirty days, the petitioners' application for renewal of the same shall be considered and decided without being influenced by the final conclusion and penalty of cancellation of licence. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)