Tuesday, 28, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M/S. Bansl Store vs Govt. Of N.C.T. Of Delhi & Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 5158 Del

Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 5158 Del
Judgement Date : 11 November, 2013

Delhi High Court
M/S. Bansl Store vs Govt. Of N.C.T. Of Delhi & Ors. on 11 November, 2013
Author: V. K. Jain
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                            Date of Decision: 11.11.2013

+      W.P.(C) 6903/2013
       M/S. BANSL STORE                             ..... Petitioner
                        Through: Mr Pradeep Gupta, Mr Parinva
                        Gupta, Advs.

                            versus

       GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS.            ..... Respondents
                       Through: Mr Amiet Andlay, Adv for
                       Assistant Commissioner (North)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN

                                JUDGMENT

V.K.JAIN, J. (ORAL)

Clause 4 of Delhi Specified Articles (Regulation of Distribution)

Order, 1981, reads as under:-

" 4. Suspension/cancellation of authorization:

(1) The Administrator or the Deputy Commissioner may at any time, whether at the request of the person to whom an authorization has been issued or on his contravention or attempt to contravene any of the provisions of the said order or directions issued thereunder from time to time in this behalf or any term or condition of the authorization or any directions issued thereunder after making such enquiry as may be deemed necessary without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against him

to amend, suspend or rescind the authorization issued under this Order.

(2) Without prejudice to any action that may be taken under sub-clause (1) in respect if any contravention of any of the provisions made by or under this order, the Deputy Commissioner may forfeit the whole or a part of the security deposited under sub clause (2) thereupon the authorized wholesaler or fair price shop holder whose security has been forfeited shall forthwith deposit an amount equivalent to the forfeited so as to make the efficiency in the amount of prescribed amount of security. Provided that before passing any order under sub-clause (1) or sub clause (2), the Deputy Commissioner shall give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the party concerned.

Provided further that if the authorization is under consideration for action and it is necessary to suspend it pending enquiry the provisions contained in the foregoing proviso shall not apply subject to the condition that the period of such suspension shall not exceed three months.

Provided further that a copy of every order made under sub clause (1) or sub clause (2) shall be supplied to the person concerned free of charge."

2. It would thus be seen that the Administrator or Deputy

Commissioner is competent to amend, suspend or rescind, the

authorization, after making appropriate enquiries, in terms of sub-clause

(1) of clause 4, extracted above. However, he must necessarily give a

reasonable opportunity of hearing to the concerned party in terms of the

first proviso to the aforesaid order. If, however, in a particular case, the

Administrator or the Deputy Commissioner, as the case may be, deems

it necessary to suspend the authorization pending enquiry contemplated

under sub-clause (1) of clause 4, he can suspend such authorization,

without giving an opportunity of hearing for the purpose of such

suspension. A conjoint reading of the aforesaid clause would mean that

if the Administrator or the Deputy Commissioner, as to the case may be,

seeks to amend, suspend or rescind the authorization, he will give an

opportunity of hearing to the person concerned in terms of the first

proviso, but in a case where he also deems it necessary to suspend the

authorization pending such enquiry, he may do so for a limited period of

three months from the date on which the suspension is ordered. He need

not give an opportunity of hearing before ordering suspension, in view

of the second proviso to the order. In case, the Administrator of the

Deputy Commissioner, as the case may be, takes a final decision on

amending, suspending or rescinding the authorization, before expiry of

the aforesaid period of three months, the matter has to thereafter be dealt

with in terms of the final order passed by him. If suspension order does

not specify the period of suspension of the authorization and no final

order on the proposed amendment, suspension or rescission is taken,

within a period of three months from the date on which the authorization

was suspended, such authorization automatically revives on expiry of

the aforesaid period of three months. For this purpose, the period of

three months shall compute from the date on which the authorization

was suspended. I also agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner

that it would be necessary for the Administrator or Deputy

Commissioner, as the case may be, while exercising his power under the

second proviso has to form an opinion and record it in his order that it is

necessary to suspend the authorization pending enquiry contemplated

under the said order.

3. In the case before this Court, the authorization came to be

suspended on 21.08.2013. In case a final decision in the matter is taken

by the concerned officer within three months from the date on which the

authorization was suspended, further consequences in the matter would

flow only in terms of the final order passed by the officer. If, however,

he does not pass a final order within a period of three months from the

date of suspension, order suspending the authorization shall get revived

immediately on expiry of three months, computed from the date of

suspension order. It is made clear that the concerned officer can

continue with enquiry even after expiry of three months from the date of

suspension and proceed to pass a final order, after giving opportunity of

hearing to the person concerned and the only effect of his not being able

to pass a final order within three months, from the date of suspension

would be automatic revival of authorization, on expiry of three months

from the date of suspension.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Dasti under the signature of the Court Master.

V.K. JAIN, J

NOVEMBER 11, 2013 BG

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter