M/S Rabbit Hole v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation And ANR

$~46 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 7593/2017 & CM APPLs. 31325-31326/2017 M/S RABBIT HOLE ..... Petitioner Through Mr. J.P. Sengh, Sr. Adv with Mr.

Prashant Kr. Umrao, Ms. Sara Ansari and Ms. Manisha Mehta, Advs.

versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Kapil Dutta and Ms. Diksha Lal, Advs for R-1.

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh and Ms.

Aneet Bagga, Advs for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 29.08.2017 Petitioner is aggrieved of the revocation-cum-closure notice dated 17.8.2017 issued by the Dy. Health Officer, South Zone, whereby, the health trade licence of the petitioner to carry out the business activities of eating house has come to be revoked. The reasons given in the impugned revocation-cum-closure notice, are, as follows :

"Whereas you have obtained online health trade license for the trade of Eating House with 48 seats in the name & style of M/S Rabbit Hole situated at premises no. 30, 3rd and 4th floor, Hauz Khas Village New Delhi.

Whereas your Eating House premises was inspected by the area public health inspector on 16/8/17 and you have been found running the eating house with more than 48 seats and under most insanitary and unhygienic conditions. It is a

serious violation of terms & condition of health trade license. Whereas you were issued a show cause notice also vide no. DHO/SZ/2017/D-655 dated 26/7/2017 but on inspection you were found running the eating house under similar condition without any improvement.

Therefore, your health trade license for the above said eating house is hereby revoked and you are directed to close the trade of eating house within 48 hrs from the receipt of this letter; failing which further legal action will be taken as per DMC act including sealing of your premises."

It is not in dispute that the subject eating house is being run on a notified road and that, health trade licence was issued to the petitioner on 01.04.2017, which was further renewed on 31.07.2017. During the course of hearing, Mr. Dutta, ld. counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that no hearing has come to be given to the petitioner before issuing the impugned revocation-cumclosure notice either on ground of alleged insanitary and unhygienic conditions or excessive seating capacity. On the face of it, it is violation of the principles of natural justice. Suffice to say, no adverse orders should have been passed by a statutory authority having extended certain privileges without following the rule of audi alteram partem, which is a well settled proposition of law. Impugned revocation-cum-closure notice therefore, cannot be sustained on that ground itself and is quashed accordingly.

Instant impugned revocation-cum-closure notice is exactly identical to the revocation-cum-closure notice which was quashed in WP(C) No. 7279/2017. It appears that similar orders have come to be

passed and it is subjecting the licencees to unnecessary litigation. It goes without saying that if the facts and circumstances in one case have already been adjudicated upon by the Court, it should have a binding effect on the similarly placed other cases. Respondent is therefore, directed to take necessary steps in that regard, so that unnecessary litigation is avoided.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly.

Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. A. K. CHAWLA, J AUGUST 29, 2017 ac