Bandhani Munda v. The Secretary (Sta) And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

WPA/831/2023 Bandhani Munda Vs.

The Secretary (STA) and another Mrs. Anjili Nag ... for the petitioner Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the respondents July 24, 2023 (SR) Item No.2 The present writ petition has been preferred challenging, inter alia, an order dated 5th July, 2023 passed by the Secretary (STA), Directorate of Transport.

Mrs. Nag, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased an auto- rickshaw and was plying the vehicle after obtaining route permit from the competent authority. Without any notice and without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order dated 5th July, 2023 was passed suspending the petitioner's permit. The order thus suffers from blatant violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner has suffered civil consequences and his right to livelihood is at stake. Per contra Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing for the Administration submits that by the impugned order permission has been granted to the petitioner to make a substantive representation so that the same may be considered by the competent authority.

There is no infirmity in the order impugned inasmuch as according to the authorities a single person upon purchasing several auto-rickshaws are plying the same by engaging people from outside the Islands. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record. Indisputably the petitioner plies an auto-rickshaw and that appears to be his sole source of livelihood.

order the petitioner's permit has been suspended and that too without granting an opportunity of hearing.

In view thereof, the order dated 5th July, 2023 passed by the respondent no. 1 is set aside.

It is, however, directed that the petitioner shall submit a representation to the respondent no. 1 within 5th August, 2023. In event such representation is submitted, the said respondent shall consider the same, upon granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and take a decision, in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner by 17th August, 2023. In the event the petitioner's representation is rejected, the said order of the respondent no.1 shall remain stayed for a period of seven days thereafter.

In the present writ petition the guidelines framed by the respondent authorities in the month of April, 2007 have also been challenged. However, since the present writ petition is being disposed of only considering the sustainability of the order dated 5th July, 2023 passed by the respondent no. 1, the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge the said guidelines of April, 2007 in subsequent proceedings and the respondents would be at liberty to take appropriate defense against such challenge. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, may be supplied to the parties upon compliance of usual formalities.

(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)