Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mohammed Shah Nawaz, proprietor of Shah Nawaz and Brothers, had been carrying on business as a commission agent in the vegetable market at Kalaburagi since 2008 under a licence granted by the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC), the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent constructed new shops to better regulate the yard and facilitate wholesale business. The petitioner was allotted a shop and paid the required amount. However, the 5th respondent issued an endorsement dated 21.10.2014 cancelling the allotment in favour of the petitioner and allotting the shop to the 6th respondent, Haji Altaf and Company. The petitioner challenged this endorsement by way of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking its quashing and cancellation of the allotment in favour of the 6th respondent. The main legal issue was whether the cancellation of the allotment without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing was valid. The petitioner argued that the endorsement was passed without any notice or opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. The respondents contended that the cancellation was justified as the petitioner had not complied with certain conditions. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the impugned endorsement was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which is arbitrary and violative of natural justice. The court quashed the endorsement and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's case afresh after giving him a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The writ petition was allowed in part.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Cancellation of Allotment - Right to be Heard - The petitioner's licence and allotment of a shop in the APMC yard was cancelled by an endorsement without any prior notice or opportunity of hearing - The court held that such cancellation without affording an opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice and arbitrary - The impugned endorsement was quashed and the matter remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioner (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the endorsement cancelling the allotment of a shop in favour of the petitioner without affording him an opportunity of hearing is valid in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed in part. The impugned endorsement dated 21.10.2014 is quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh after affording him a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to be heard
- cancellation of allotment without notice
- arbitrary exercise of power
- principles of administrative law
