IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7482 of 1996
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
————————————————————–
SURESHBHAI CHHOTELAL VARMA
Versus
COLLECTOR
————————————————————–
Appearance:
MR NM KAPADIA for Petitioner
Ms.HARSHA DEVANI ADDL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
for Respondent No. 1
————————————————————–
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL
Date of decision: 06/02/97
ORAL JUDGEMENT
Rule. Ms. Harsha Devani, learned Assistant
Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule on
behalf of the respondent.
At the request of learned advocates appearing for
the parties, the petition is heard today.
What is challenged in the present petition which
is filed under Art. 226 of Constitution, is order dt.
October 18, 1996 passed by respondent under Sec.6A of the
Essential Commodities Act, 1955 confiscating tanker
bearing registration no.GRX 4717. The grievance made in
the petition is that before rendering the impugned
decision, the respondent has not heard the petitioner.
The fact that the petitioner is not heard by the
respondent before passing the impugned order, is not in
dispute. In view of the provisions of Sec.6A of the
Essential Commodities Act, 1955, it hardly needs to be
emphasized that the person affected must be heard by the
competent authority before passing the order. As the
impugned order is passed in complete violation of
principles of natural justice, it is liable to be set
aside.
For the foregoing reasons, the petition succeeds.
The impugned order dt. October 8, 1996 rendered by the
respondent is hereby set aside and quashed. Matter is
remitted to the respondent for deciding afresh on merits
and in accordance with law. The respondent shall issue
notice to the petitioner and after hearing the
petitioner, take appropriate decision in the matter.
Rule is made absolute accordingly, with no order as to
costs
——–
