High Court quashes vague cancellation notice, emphasizes need for specific facts and fair hearing

The High Court found the show cause notice for cancellation of registration to be vague and lacking specific facts, rendering it unsustainable. It was noted that the cancellation order was passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, despite references to a reply and a personal hearing. The court accepted the explanation for a discrepancy in the order but ultimately quashed both the show cause notice and the cancellation order. The court emphasized that the flawed notice could not support the cancellation of registration and declined to grant liberty to proceed afresh, suggesting compliance with legal provisions if permissible.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of the show cause notice for cancellation of registration.
2. Legality of the cancellation order passed without affording an opportunity of hearing.
3. Explanation provided for the discrepancy in the cancellation order.
4. Decision on the writ petition challenging the cancellation order.

Analysis:
1. The High Court analyzed the show cause notice for cancellation of registration, highlighting its vagueness and lack of specific facts enabling a response. The court noted that the notice did not provide adequate details for the noticee to give a proper reply, rendering it unsustainable.

2. The court addressed the legality of the cancellation order passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing or waiting for a reply. It was observed that although the cancellation order referred to a reply submitted by the petitioner and a personal hearing, the petitioner had not actually submitted any reply nor been given a chance for a hearing. This fact was not contested by the respondent's counsel.

3. The respondent's counsel explained that a technical glitch in the online portal caused a discrepancy leading to the cancellation order. The court acknowledged the explanation provided and noted that the reply filed by the respondent was on record. However, the court did not delve into the merits of the impugned order due to the unsustainable nature of the show cause notice.

4. Ultimately, the court allowed the writ petition, quashing both the show cause notice and the cancellation order. The court emphasized that the cancellation of registration resulting from the flawed show cause notice could not be sustained. While the respondent requested liberty to proceed afresh, the court declined to grant such an order but observed that if permissible by law, the respondent could proceed afresh in accordance with legal provisions.

---