Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, five proprietors of firms, were allotted sand ghats through an auction process. However, the respondents issued a re-auction notice on 21st January, 2016 and an order on 27th January, 2016 cancelling the allotments in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners challenged these actions by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The court had earlier issued notice and permitted re-auction but directed that no allotment be made without court permission. Two intervenors, who claimed to be the highest bidders in the re-auction, were impleaded. The core legal issue was whether the cancellation of allotment without affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing was valid. The petitioners argued that the cancellation violated principles of natural justice. The respondents contended that the cancellation was justified due to some irregularities. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the cancellation order and re-auction notice were unsustainable as they were passed without giving any notice or hearing to the petitioners. The court quashed both the cancellation order and the re-auction notice, thereby restoring the allotments in favour of the petitioners. The court also directed that the interim order preventing allotment to the successful bidder would stand vacated. The decision was based on the fundamental principle that no adverse order can be passed against a person without affording them an opportunity of being heard.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Cancellation of Allotment - Right to be Heard - The petitioners were allotted sand ghats through auction, but the respondents cancelled the allotments and issued a re-auction notice without giving any notice or hearing to the petitioners. The court held that such cancellation without affording an opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and is unsustainable. (Paras 1-6) B) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Writ Jurisdiction - Quashing of Cancellation Order - The court, exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, quashed the cancellation order dated 27th January, 2016 and the re-auction notice dated 21st January, 2016, as the cancellation was done without hearing the petitioners. (Paras 1-6) C) Mining Law - Sand Ghat Allotment - Re-auction - Maharashtra Minor Mineral Rules, 1966 - The allotment of sand ghats was cancelled and re-auction was proposed. The court found that the cancellation was arbitrary and without jurisdiction as no opportunity of hearing was given to the allottees. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the cancellation of allotment of sand ghats in favour of the petitioners without affording them an opportunity of hearing is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The court quashed the re-auction notice dated 21st January, 2016 and the cancellation order dated 27th January, 2016, and restored the allotments in favour of the petitioners. The interim order preventing allotment to the successful bidder was vacated.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to be heard
- cancellation of allotment without notice
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Maharashtra Minor Mineral Rules
- 1966
