A. Usha Rani vs The District Collector, The Sub-Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer and Syndicate Bank

P.K. Misra, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

The Petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.5.1995 passed by the District Collector, first Respondent, cancelling community certificate granted to the Petitioner by the Sub-collector in the year 1982.

learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has submitted that without issuing any show cause notice to the Petitioner regarding the alleged mistakes in the community certificate, the Petitioner was simply noticed to appear before the Collector and thereafter, the Collector has cancelled the community certificate on the basis of the materials which had been collected behind the back of the Petitioner. It has been submitted that without calling upon the Petitioner to file her reply relating to the allegations, if any against the Petitioner, cancellation of community certificate issued to her is against the principles of natural justice.

In the counter filed by the Respondents it has been stated that though no show cause notice had been issued, the Petitioner had been called upon to appear in person before the Collector. It has been further stated that a discreet enquiry has been made and on the basis of the report of the second Respondent, action has been taken.

It is apparent from the counter affidavit that cancellation has been made on the basis of the report of the second Respondent. Such report was made on the basis of ''discreet enquiry'' obviously held behind the back of the Petitioner. Even at the time, when the Petitioner was appearing before the Collector the report of the second Respondent has not been shown to her nor other materials collected behind the back of the Petitioner by the second Respondent had been brought to her notice. It is thus obvious that principles of natural justice had been violated while passing the order of cancellation.

Similar question was decided by a Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in 1997 W.L.R.33, wherein it was observed that principles of natural justice are to be followed in such cases. The Apex Court has considered a similar question in the decision reported in 1999 (3) L.L.N. 832, wherein it was observed that without issuing show cause notice, the cancellation of the certificate was not proper.

It is of course true that the Petitioner has been called upon to appear before the Collector. However, without being aware of the allegations, merely asking her to appear before the Collector was of no consequence because the Petitioner was kept in darkness. The report of the second Respondent, on the basis of which cancellation had been made as admitted in the counter, had also not been supplied to the Petitioner. Thus there cannot be any doubt that there has been gross violation of principles of natural justice in cancelling the community certificate and such order cannot be sustained.

learned Counsel appearing for the State has submitted that by virtue of the subsequent G.O.(2D) No. 18 dated 1.4.1997, a committee has been constituted to go into the matter relating to verification of community certificate. Thus it is made clear that if any occasion arises in future to verify the community certificate granted to the Petitioner, it can be done so in accordance with the aforesaid Company, after complying with the principles of natural justice. Subject to the above said observation, the order dated 18.5.1995 passed by the first Respondent is quashed. Writ petition is ordered accordingly and there is no order as to costs. Thereby, WMP No. 13326 of 1995 is closed.