The High Court quashed an order cancelling the petitioner's contractor registration due to lack of opportunity of hearing and allowed the writ petition, remitting the matter for fresh proceedings with a hearing.
Impugned order cancelled registration is quashed; respondent directed to pass fresh order after affording hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6435 of 2016
Petitioner :- Ravi Prakash Bajpai Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel holding brief of Sri K.K.Tripathi learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.12.2015 passed by the respondent no.4 (Annexure No.1 to the writ petition) whereby registration of the petitioner as a contractor in D-category has been cancelled on the allegations contained in the order as well as for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.4 to restore the petitioner's registration as a contractor in D-category.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, order impugned has been passed.
Learned Standing Counsel was granted time to file counter affidavit way back in the year 2016 but no rebuttal has been filed till date to adjudicate the matter.
Since no any opportunity was granted to the petitioner prior to cancelling the registration of the petitioner, therefore we are of the considered view, that the order impugned is liable to be quashed.
Accordingly, the order impugned dated 28.12.2015 passed by the respondent no.4 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) is quashed. However, the respondent no.2 will be at liberty to pass fresh order in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
The writ petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 6.12.2018 S.Ali
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the cancellation of contractor registration without affording opportunity of hearing is liable to be quashed?
Ravi Prakash Bajpai
State Of U.P.
Shashi Kant Gupta
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
