Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Gautam Kathalu Hiwale, an APL card holder, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging an order dated 16.1.2019 passed by the Honourable Cabinet Minister for Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Maharashtra. The Minister had allowed a revision filed by respondent No.5, a fair price shop license holder, and restored his license after almost eight years of its cancellation. The petitioner's grievance was that the Minister ignored the statements of 21 card holders and the concurrent findings of the District Supply Officer and the Deputy Commissioner, Civil Supplies, who had cancelled the license based on irregularities. The Minister imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000 and restored the license, granting the license holder one opportunity to run the business. The petitioner argued that the revision was not maintainable under Clause 24(1) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1975, as the provision only allows suo motu revision or revision on application, but the revision was filed after an inordinate delay of eight years. Additionally, the petitioner was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing before the revision was allowed, violating principles of natural justice. The Government Pleader initially submitted that the Minister's order was being withdrawn, but the petitioner pressed the maintainability issue. The High Court examined the provision and found that the revision was filed after eight years, which was grossly delayed. The court also noted that the petitioner, being the original complainant, was not heard. The court held that the Minister's order was passed in gross violation of natural justice and was unsustainable. The court quashed and set aside the order dated 16.1.2019 and directed that if the license holder files a revision within four weeks, the Minister shall decide it afresh after hearing all parties, including the petitioner. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Revision without Notice to Complainant - Clause 24(1) of Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1975 - The Minister allowed revision of a fair price shop license holder and restored his license after eight years of cancellation, without hearing the original complainant who had lodged the complaint leading to cancellation. The High Court held that the revision order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice as the complainant was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing. The order was quashed and set aside. (Paras 4-10) B) Food and Civil Supplies - Fair Price Shop License - Cancellation and Restoration - Clause 24(1) of Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1975 - The District Supply Officer and Deputy Commissioner had concurrently found the license holder guilty of irregularities based on statements of 21 card holders and cancelled the license. The Minister, in revision, imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000 and restored the license without considering the concurrent findings. The High Court held that the Minister's order was unsustainable as it ignored the evidence and findings of lower authorities. (Paras 6-10) C) Administrative Law - Revision Power - Suo Motu or on Application - Clause 24(1) of Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1975 - The provision vests the competent authority with power to cause a revision suo motu or on an application. However, the revision must be filed within a reasonable time. In this case, the revision was filed after eight years of cancellation, which was held to be grossly delayed and not maintainable. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Honourable Minister could allow a revision filed by a fair price shop license holder and restore his license without hearing the original complainant, and whether the revision was maintainable under Clause 24(1) of the Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1975.
Final Decision
The High Court quashed and set aside the order dated 16.1.2019 passed by the Honourable Minister. It directed that if respondent No.5 files a revision within four weeks from the date of the order, the Minister shall decide the revision afresh after hearing all parties, including the petitioner, in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Revision power under Clause 24(1) of Maharashtra Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1975
- Maintainability of revision without hearing complainant
- Suo motu revision power
