Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Gregory Daniel B. Shah, an Overseas Citizen of India holding an excise bar licence in Goa, challenged an order dated 2nd February 2018 passed by the Commissioner of Excise, Goa. By that order, the Commissioner suspended the petitioner's excise bar licence and issued a show cause notice as to why the licence should not be recommended for cancellation to the Government. The background facts reveal that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 15th January 2018 based on a complaint from Shri Rohidas Naik and others. The petitioner filed a reply on 22nd January 2018 and appeared for personal hearing on 29th January 2018 as directed. On that date, the petitioner requested more time to argue the case, which was acceded to by the Commissioner, and the matter was adjourned to 6th March 2018 for hearing. However, before that date, the Commissioner passed the impugned order on 2nd February 2018, suspending the licence and issuing the show cause notice for cancellation, based on the very same allegations. The petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, contending that the order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice as he was not heard before the adverse order was made. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found that the impugned order was indeed passed without affording the petitioner a hearing, despite the fact that the Commissioner had already granted an adjournment for that purpose. The Court held that such an action was arbitrary and violative of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 2nd February 2018 and directed the Commissioner to proceed with the hearing on 6th March 2018 as previously scheduled, and thereafter pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Audi Alteram Partem - Suspension of Licence - The Commissioner of Excise suspended the petitioner's excise bar licence and issued a show cause notice for cancellation without hearing him, despite having granted an adjournment for hearing on a later date. The High Court held that the order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not heard before the adverse order was made. (Paras 5-6) B) Excise Law - Licence Suspension - Show Cause Notice - The impugned order dated 2nd February 2018 was based on the same allegations as the show cause notice dated 15th January 2018, for which the petitioner had already filed a reply and was granted an adjournment to 6th March 2018 for hearing. The Court held that passing the suspension order without waiting for the scheduled hearing was arbitrary and violative of natural justice. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Commissioner of Excise could suspend the petitioner's bar licence and issue a show cause notice for cancellation without affording him a hearing, especially after having granted an adjournment for that purpose.
Final Decision
The High Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 2nd February 2018 and directed the Commissioner of Excise to proceed with the hearing on 6th March 2018 as previously scheduled, and thereafter pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- audi alteram partem
- suspension without hearing
- show cause notice
- adjournment
- prejudice
