THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI W.P.No.22981of 2011 Between: Seed Works India Private Limited Rep. By its Finance Controller, Mr. T.N. Rajan PETITIONER And 1. The Licensing Authority & Additional Director of Agriculture – II (Seeds) O/o. Commissioner & Director of Agriculture Government of Andhra Pradesh Opp: L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh Hyderabad – 500 001, and another. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioners: Sri C.R. Sridharan Counsel for the respondents: G.P. for Agriculture Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner, an incorporated company, engaged in the business of breeding, production and marketing of hybrid seeds has filed this writ petition assailing the order of the 1st respondent- Licensing Authority and Additional Director of Agriculture – II (Seeds) No. SR Cell (1) 714/2011, dated 09.08.2011, suspending the licence of the petitioner for a period of 10 days, pending further enquiry in the matter. The challenge to the order is mainly on the ground that the order is in violation of the principles of natural justice as no opportunity has been provided to the petitioner. The petitioner holds a licence bearing No.115, dated 15.11.2002 authorizing it to carry business as a dealer in the seeds named in the said licence. Tomato seed ‘US3140’ variety is one such seed authorized as a private research variety / hybrid for trial marketing. It appears that the said tomato seed sold by the petitioner- company to the farmers has failed causing extensive damage to the farmers. On a complaint received from the concerned MLA, the 1st respondent initiated action by issuing a show cause notice No. SR Cell (1) 714/2011, dated 09.08.2011 alleging that even though the said variety is meant for trial marketing, the petitioner had resorted to handling more quantity of the seed in contravention of the licence conditions and called upon the petitioner to submit its explanation. On the same day separate proceedings were issued suspending the licence for a period of 10 days subject to further course of inquiry and action. Various contentions have been raised touching the merits of the case contending that the quality of the seed is time tested and the damage, if any, caused to the farmers is not attributable to the quality of the seeds. I am not inclined to consider the matter on merits since the competent authority is yet to enquire in the matter. There is no dispute that the 1st respondent has issued notice dated 09.08.2011 calling upon the petitioner to submit its explanation by 10.08.2011. It is stated that the said notice was served on the petitioner on the night of 09.08.2011. There was hardly any time to the petitioner to submit its explanation to the show cause notice. The 1st respondent having initiated the proceedings in clause 15 of the Seeds (Control) Order, 1983 ought to have accorded reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. By no stretch of imagination can it be held that a day’s notice would comply the principles of natural justice. A counter is filed by the 1st respondent inter alia stating that the impugned order is justified, as there is prima facie material that the petitioner has contravened the Seeds (Control) Order 1983 and violated the conditions of the licence. Whether the petitioner has contravened the conditions of the licence and violated the said provisions of the Control Order to be gone into only after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. In the circumstances as above, the impugned order, which has been passed without due notice to the petitioner is liable to be interfered with and has to be set aside. Accordingly the impugned order is set aside. The 1st respondent shall issue fresh show cause notice giving reasonable time to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Learned Government Pleader submits that even though under the licence the petitioner is authorized to deal with tomato seed ‘US3140’ variety for marketing only for the purpose of research and trial marketing, it is conducting extensive sales in violation of the licence conditions. In view of the said submission, it is made clear that the petitioner shall deal with the seeds including ‘US3140’ variety tomato seed strictly as per the conditions of licence No.115 dated 15.11.2002. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 25th August, 2011. Js.