Karnataka High Court Quashes License Cancellation Orders in APMC Case — Violation of Natural Justice. Petitioners' licenses cancelled without show cause notice or hearing, set aside for non-compliance with Section 127 of Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused
  • 155
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, three firms engaged in flower, fruit, and vegetable trading in Tumakuru, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Karnataka High Court. They challenged two orders: one dated 03.01.2020 issued by the Director of Agricultural Marketing (first respondent) cancelling their licenses, and another dated 22.01.2020 issued by the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (second respondent) cancelling their licenses. The petitioners contended that both orders were passed without any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing, in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the mandatory requirements of Section 127 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966. The respondents did not file any statement of objections. The court, after hearing the counsel for the petitioners and the respondents, noted that the impugned orders were indeed passed without any prior notice or hearing. The court observed that Section 127 of the Act requires that before cancelling a license, the authority must issue a show cause notice and provide an opportunity of hearing to the licensee. Since this was not done, the orders were unsustainable in law. The court quashed both impugned orders but granted liberty to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law, after issuing proper show cause notices and affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The writ petition was allowed accordingly.

Headnote

A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Cancellation of License - Section 127 of Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 - Petitioners challenged orders dated 03.01.2020 and 22.01.2020 cancelling their licenses under the APMC Act without any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing - Court held that the impugned orders are in violation of principles of natural justice and Section 127 of the Act, which mandates a show cause notice and hearing before cancellation - Orders quashed with liberty to respondents to initiate fresh proceedings after giving due notice and hearing (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the cancellation of petitioners' licenses by the Director of Agricultural Marketing without issuing a show cause notice and affording an opportunity of hearing is valid in law.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 03.01.2020 and 22.01.2020 are quashed. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law after issuing show cause notice and affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • audi alteram partem
  • show cause notice
  • opportunity of hearing
  • cancellation of license
  • Section 127 of Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act
  • 1966
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 249

Writ Petition No. 5988 of 2020 (APMC)

2020-07-23

P.B. Bajanthri

B. Prabhudeva, Laxminarayana, T. Swaroop

M/S. Lakshminarasimhaswamy Prasanna, M/S. Chandrakala G., M/S. Lakshminarasimhaswamy Prasanna

The Director of Agricultural Marketing, The Agricultural Produce Market Committee

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging cancellation of licenses under the APMC Act.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of orders dated 03.01.2020 and 22.01.2020 cancelling petitioners' licenses.

Filing Reason

Orders cancelling licenses were passed without show cause notice or opportunity of hearing.

Issues

Whether the impugned orders cancelling licenses were passed in violation of principles of natural justice and Section 127 of the Karnataka APMC Act.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the orders were passed without any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing, violating natural justice and Section 127 of the Act. Respondents did not file any statement of objections.

Ratio Decidendi

Cancellation of a license under Section 127 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 requires a show cause notice and an opportunity of hearing. Orders passed without such notice and hearing are in violation of principles of natural justice and are liable to be quashed.

Judgment Excerpts

In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the orders dated 03.01.2020... (ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the orders dated 22.1.2020... Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents. Perused the petition averments. The impugned orders have been passed without issuing show cause notice and affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Therefore, the impugned orders are in violation of principles of natural justice and Section 127 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru on an unspecified date. The petition was heard through video conference on 23.07.2020 and disposed of on the same day.

Acts & Sections

  • Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966: 127
  • Constitution of India: 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Leave Encashment to Retired Judge Appointed as President of State Consumer Commission. Petitioner entitled to leave encashment under Maharashtra Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1981 for entire tenure, not limited to COVID-19 pe...
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Dismisses Members' Challenge to Registration of Bye-law Amendments Under Section 10 of Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 — Lack of Locus Standi. Individual members cannot challenge registration of amendments as Act pro...