SCA/16523/2007 4/ 4 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16523 of 2007 ========================================================= M.P.S. PHILIP - Petitioner(s) Versus UNION OF INDIA & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR DP KINARIWALA for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR HARIN P RAVAL for Respondent(s) : 1, MR MANAV A MEHTA for Respondent(s) : 1, MR SV RAJU for Respondent(s) : 2 - 4. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 07/07/2008 ORAL ORDER
The
petitioner of this petition has prayed for appropriate writ to
direct the respondent authority to issue Security Clearance
Certificate to the petitioner.
Heard
Mr.Kinnariwala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
Mr.Manav Mehta for respondent No.1, Central Government Standing
Counsel, Mr. Chetan Pandya for Mr.S.V. Raju for respondents Nos. 2,
3 & 4.
Upon
hearing the learned advocate appearing for both the sides and the
perusal of the order dated 13.06.2007 shows that there is only
communication for not granting the Security Clearance Certificate
and no reason whatsoever is mentioned. Apart from the above, during
the course of the hearing, Mr. Pandya, learned counsel appearing for
Bureau of Civil Aviation Security has placed on record the copy of
the communication dated 30.03.2007 addressed by the Deputy
Commissioner of Security (Civil Aviation), CSI, intimating that the
security clearance is not granted because it has come to the notice
that the said Company, i.e. the petitioner herein is infringing the
labour laws and exploitating the labourers and misusing the labour
license.
Such
a ground on the part of the Deputy Commissioner of Security is also
without any material produced on the record of this Court nor any
opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner.
Under
these circumstances, neither the order of Bureau of Civil Aviation
Security nor the order dated 13.06.2007 (Annexure-D) can be
sustained in view of the non-compliance of the principles of natural
justice of no opportunity given to the petitioner nor any reasons
mentioned therein so far as the communication of the order dated
13.06.2007 is concerned.
At
this stage, Mr.Pandya, learned counsel appearing for the respondent
Nos.2 to 4 states that if this Court directs, the opportunity of
hearing shall be given, but the petitioner may be directed to
cooperate with the same.
Mr.Mehta,
for respondent No.1 submitted that it is only after the opinion on
the security clearance granted or not granted, the Civil Aviation
Department may be required to take further action.
Under
these circumstances, the following directions:
The
petitioner shall be given opportunity of hearing by the Deputy
Commissioner of Security (Civil Application) of the Bureau of Civil
Aviation Security, Government of India, New Delhi. The petitioner
shall cooperate in the hearing of the matter.
The
said authority shall take appropriate decision within a period of
one month from the receipt of the order of this Court.
In
view of the above, the matter shall be decided afresh by the
aforesaid authority in accordance with law.
Until
the decision is taken and the same is communicated to the petitioner
by Regd. A.D.Post, ad interim relief granted earlier shall continue
to remain in operation with the clarification that in the event the
license of the petitioner expires by afflux of time and not renewed,
no further rights shall accrue to the petitioner for continuing with
the same activity.
It
is hardly required to be stated that if any untoward incident
happens pending the consideration and the petitioner continues
pursuant to the interim order, the petitioner will be responsible in
all respects for any act of himself or his agents or servants.
Petition
is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid direction. D.S.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.)
*bjoy