AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 199 wordsHeard Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, the learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for the State.
The grievance of the petitioner is that his license has been cancelled but before that, only three days’ time was given to him to represent his cause. Though he could anyhow file his show-cause reply, but the same has also not been adverted to.
A perusal of the order impugned indicates that the grounds raised on behalf of the petitioner has actually been adverted to, but has not been accepted.
In any view of the matter, the petitioner has the remedy of preferring an appeal against the aforesaid order.
In that event, this Court directs the petitioner to prefer an appeal, if so desired, before the appellate authority within a period of 60 days.
Should such an appeal be filed, the appellate authority, after giving reasonably sufficient time to the petitioner to represent his cause, shall pass a reasoned order within a further period of 60 days thereafter. The copy of such order shall be made available to the petitioner forthwith.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.
