Final refusal of CHA licence renewal could not be reopened; fresh licence claim remained open under the regulations.

A final refusal to renew a CHA licence, once affirmed and not set aside by a superior forum, could not be reopened or treated as ineffective by the original authority through later short-term renewals or by invoking a general power to amend orders; the licence was therefore regarded as having ceased to exist and renewal failed. The alternative request for a fresh or regular licence under the licensing regulations was not adjudicated in the proceedings below, so it was not examined on merits in the appeal and was left open for independent consideration before the Commissioner. The renewal challenge was rejected, while separate remedies for a fresh licence remained available.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the refusal to renew the CHA licence could be reopened or treated as ineffective after the earlier order had attained finality; (ii) whether the alternative request for grant of a fresh or regular licence under the licensing regulations could be considered in the appeal.

Issue (i): whether the refusal to renew the CHA licence could be reopened or treated as ineffective after the earlier order had attained finality.

Analysis: The earlier order refusing renewal had not been set aside by any higher forum. It had been carried in writ proceedings, where interference was declined, and the order was treated as having attained finality. On that basis, the licence was held to have ceased to exist and there was nothing subsisting that could be renewed. Subsequent renewals granted for short periods did not revive the earlier rejected renewal, because the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to amend or override his own conscious adjudicatory decision in the manner suggested. The general clauses principle was held inapplicable because the matter was not one of minor correction but of reversal of a final substantive decision.

Conclusion: The challenge to the finding that no licence existed for renewal failed, and the issue was decided against the appellant.

Issue (ii): whether the alternative request for grant of a fresh or regular licence under the licensing regulations could be considered in the appeal.

Analysis: The request under the relevant licensing regulations had not been placed before the Commissioner in the proceedings under challenge. Since that question had not been adjudicated below, it was not examined on merits in the appeal.

Conclusion: The alternative request was left open for consideration before the Commissioner, and no relief was granted on that issue in the appeal.

Final Conclusion: The order refusing renewal was sustained, while the appellant was left at liberty to pursue any independent remedy for a fresh licence under the applicable regulations.

Ratio Decidendi: A final order refusing renewal of a licence, once confirmed and not set aside by a superior forum, cannot be reopened or nullified by the original authority through subsequent temporary renewals or by invoking the general power to amend orders; only the specified appellate or supervisory forum can disturb such finality.

---