The High Court set aside an order cancelling the petitioners shop allotment and issuing a recovery certificate, holding that it was passed in violation of natural justice as the petitioner was never served with demand notices.
The order dated 13.11.2006 is set aside. A fresh order shall be passed after giving due opportunity.
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. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13391 of 2007
Petitioner :- M/S Harishankar and Co. Respondent :- State of U.P. and others Counsel for Petitioner :- M.C. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,S. Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
“ 14. That the respondents have no authority to cancel the allotment without providing opportunity to the petitioner.”
or show-cause notice referred to in para-8 of counter affidavit and no material has been placed by respondents-2 and 3 to demonstrate that alleged demand notices were ever served upon petitioner or sent to him in such a manner that presumption of deemed service could have been drawn against petitioner. In view thereof, we have no option but to accept the contention of petitioner that impugned order has been passed in utter violation of principles of natural justice.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the cancellation order violated the principles of natural justice due to lack of service of demand notices.
Whether the petitioner was given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before cancellation of the shop allotment.
M/S Harishankar and Co.
State of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
