Md. Mannan Ali v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

ORDER

15.03.2023 Heard Shri Z. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture Department.

¶2Considering the facts and circumstances and also taking into account the nature of the grievance, this writ petition is taken up for disposal.

¶3The facts projected in this writ petition is that the petitioner was a fertilizer retailer under the District Agriculture Officer, Kamrup with license upto 05.10.2026. The petitioner claims to be in the business of retail fertilizer since 1989 and has his shop at Nagarbera in the Kamrup (R) district.

¶4The petitioner was however arrested on 20.03.2022 in connection with CID Case No. 2/2022. It is the case of the petitioner that in the FIR, his name was not there and after his arrest, he was granted bail by this Court on 09.06.2022. Thereafter, the zimma of POS machine was also given to the petitioner by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) vide order dated 14.07.2022. The grievance of the petitioner is against an order of suspension as fertilizer retailer which was issued on 31.03.2022.

¶5By drawing the attention of this Court to the Bio Fertilizers and Organic Fertilizers in Fertilizer (Control) Order 1985, more particularly Clause 31(1), the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the power to place a license for the suspension is there, the tenure of such suspension is limited to 15 days Page No.# 3/3 from the date of issue. The learned counsel has submitted that suspension in the instant case of the license was done on 31.03.2022 while the petitioner was under detention after his arrest on 20.03.2022, he was granted bail on 09.06.2022. He submits that the stipulation in Clause 31(1) being clear, there cannot be any reason to prolong the order of suspension. He further submits that no opportunity of hearing has been given to the petitioner till date.

¶6Shri B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture Department however submits that the present suspension is after his arrest in a CID case and the investigation is still going on and therefore at this stage if the suspension is revoked, the investigation may be prejudiced.

¶7After hearing the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, this Court is of the view that when the order in question stipulates that an order of suspension can be for a period of 15 days in which an opportunity of hearing has to be given to the concerned party and the categorical case projected by the petitioner is that no such opportunity was granted to him, the mandate of law will take its course.

¶8In view of the above, the impugned order of suspension of license of the petitioner dated 31.03.2022 stands set aside and quashed. Liberty is further granted to the authorities to proceed with the examination of the concerned articles.

¶9Writ petition is accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010249892022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/7904/2022o MD.oMANNANoALIo PROPRIETORoOFoM/S-oMANNANoSEEDoHOUSEo@oMANANoSEEDoFARM,o S/O-oLATEoHANIFoALI,o R/O-oVILLAGEoRANGESWARIoPAM,o P.S-oNAGARBERA,oPIN-781127,o DIST-oKAMRUP,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.o OFoASSAM,oAGRICULTUREoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-781006 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoAGRICULTURE oASSAM oKHANAPARA oGUWAHATI-22 oASSAM 3:THEoDISTRICToAGRICULTUREoOFFICER oKAMRUP oASSAM oULUBARI oGUWAHATI-781007 4:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oKAMRUP oASSAM oAMINGAON oGUWAHATI-31 Page No.# 2/3 5:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE CID P.S. ASSAM GUWAHATI AT ULUBARI. PIN- 781007 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AGRI. DEPARTMENT BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI