SINHA GOVINDJI versus THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS AND OTHERS

Citation: [1962] 1 S.C.R. 540 · Decided: 23-03-1961 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUVNESHWAR PRASAD SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

March 23. 
540 
SUPREME COURT REPQRTS 
SINHA GOVINDJI 
v. 
[1962] 
THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF 
IMPORTS AND EXPORTS AND OTHERS 
(B. P. SINHA, c. J., s. K. DAS, A. K. SARKAR., 
N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR and 
J. R. MUDHOLKAR, JJ.) 
Import 
Licence-Cancellation-Grounds for cancellation-
Licensce to be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard-Prin-
ciples of natural justice-Violation of-Imports (Control) Order, 
I955. els. 8, 9, IO. 
The petitioner who was carrying on the business of the 
manufacture of celluloid and plastic bangles etc. was granted 
two licences dated January 18, 1960, and February 2, 1960, for 
the purpose of importing cellulose nitrate sheets for two licens-
ing periods, April/September, 1950, and October/March, 1960, 
On getting information that the petitioner had no machinery or 
equipment at the premises nor possessed any municipal licence 
or factory licence, the Imports and Exports authorities issued a 
notice dated May 27, 1960, to the petitioner to the effect that 
the Government of India proposed to cancel the licences grant-
ed to him, in exercise of the powers conferred by cl. g of the 
Imports (Control) Order, 1955, unless sufficient cause against 
this was furnished within ten days of the date of issue of the 
notice. The petitioner replied that as the notice did not dis-
close on which of the grounds specified in cl. 9 the proposed 
action was sought to be taken, it was not possible to show cause 
against it and that in any case he had not done anything justify-
ing the cancelJa ti on of the licences under the said rule. On July 
2, 1960, the Chief ControlJer of Imports and Exports wrote to 
the petitioner giving the information received as aforesaid and 
said: "In view of this it is clear that you had obtained the 
Essentiality Certificate from the Director of Industries fraudu-
lently and by misrepresentation of facts and thereafter obtained 
the licences in question ..... Youare called upon under cl. 10 of the 
Imports (Control) Order, 1955, to show cause, within fifteen days 
from the date of receipt of this letter, as to why further issue of 
licences to you should not be suspended, under cl. 8 of the said 
Imports (Control) Order, 1955, for contravening the Imports 
Trade Control Regulations ...... ". On August 4, 1960, the peti-
tioner received two orders dated August 3, 1960, by which the 
two licences in favour of the petitioner were cancelled. The 
petitioner challenged the validity of the aforesaid orders on the 
grounds, inter alia, that no real opportunity at all to show cause 
against the proposed cancellation was given to him in total 
disregard of the provisions of cl. IO of the Imports (Control) 
' 
I 
I S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
541 
Order, 1955, which required that "No action shall be taken 
z96z 
under els. 7, 8 or 9 unless the Iicensee ...... has been given a 
reasonable opportunity of being heard", and that the cancella-
Sinha Govindji 
tion of the licences arbitrarily deprived the petitioner of his 
v. 
fundamental right to carry on his business under Art. 19 of the Deputy Chief Con-
Constitution of India. The correspondence between the peti- i,olln of Imports 
tioner and the Import authorities showed that after the receipt 
& Expo''' 
of the letter dated July z, 1960, the petitioner had no real 
opportunity of being heard with regard to the ground alleged in 
the letter, before the cancellation orders were made on August 
3, 1960. 
Held, that on the facts of the case, there was a clear viola-
tion of the requirements of cl. roof the Imports (Control) Order 
1955, which embodied the principles of natural justice, and that 
the orders dated August 3, r960, cancelling the licences granted 
to the petitioner, were bad and must be quashed. 
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: 
Petitions Nos. 307 and 
308 of 1960. 
Petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India 
for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. 
Porus A. Mehta, J. R. Gagrat and G. Gopalakrishnan, 
for the petitioner. 
H. J. Umrigar, R. H. Dhebar and T. M. Sen, for 
the respondents. 
J 
1961. 
March 23. 
The Judgment of the Court was 
delivered by 
S. K. DAS, J.-These are two writ petitions in s. K. Das J. 
respect of two orders 'dated August 3, 1960, by which 
the Joint Chief Controller of Imports, Madras, 
cancelled two import licences, Nos. A 863296 and 
836640 dated January 18, 1960, and February 2, 
1960, respectively, granted in favour of the peti-
tioner, Messrs. Sinha Govindji of Bangalore Road, 
Bellary, 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.