IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Writ Petition no. 984 of 2008 Shubh Ananda M.Shetty ..Petitioner vs. 1. The Commissioner of Police and another ..Respondents Mr.S.P.Kanuga i/b Ms.Sapna Nath for petitioner. Mr.Shekhar Ingavale, A.G.P. for respondents. CORAM S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 21st April, 2008 21st April, 2008 21st April, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The petitioner claims to be the son of Mrs.Amba M.Shetty who was issued the original licence as evidenced by the order dated 5th April, 2008. The said Amba M. Shetty expired on 10th March, 2000. The petitioner applied for transfer of the licence in his name by virtue of the fact that he was the son of the said Amba. it appears on 17th July, 2001, a communication was addressed to the petitioner by the authorities calling upon him to produce all such documents as would enable them to consider his application for transfer. The request made by the petitioner was also for renewal of the licence which request was also kept in abeyance. 2. The petitioner claims to have been carrying on business and heard nothing from 2001. On the other hand, the Department sought to proceed against him for some violation of terms and conditions of the licence. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 5th April, 2008 communicated to the petitioner that the licence granted in favour of Amba Shetty, deceased was individual and not transferable. Upon her death on 10th March, 2000 the said licence stands cancelled automatically. In such circumstances, the petitioner cannot continue the business or run the establishment. The grievance of the petitioner is that before this communication/order no opportunity was given to him of placing before the Authority his version. His contention is that once the authority held out to him the representation and assured to consider the request for transfer, then, it was not open for them to issue the impugned communication/order. 4. After the matter was heard for some time, the learned A.G.P. Mr.Ingavale, after taking instructions from the concerned officer makes a statement that the licensing authority will now hear the petitioner and pass appropriate order afresh without being influenced by the impugned communication/order dated 5th April, 2008. 5. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner shall remain present before the Authority, namely, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone I on 29th April, 2008 at 3.00 p.m. and the said authority to pass necessary orders in accordance with law, afresh after hearing the petitioner without in any manner being influenced by the earlier communication. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)