Gold dealer licence changes in partnership need not await prior approval; technical rejection was unjustified where no disqualification existed.

A firm's gold dealer licence under Section 52 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 does not become automatically invalid merely because the partnership changes; the change may be approved by the Administrator without any requirement that approval must precede the change itself. The provision also does not require a fresh licence application in the new partnership's name before approval of the constitution change can be considered. Section 103 was treated as inapplicable because it concerns succession by death, not a voluntary change in partnership. Where the department was informed of the change and no disqualification of the incoming partner was found, rejection on a mere technicality was not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the licence of a licensed gold dealer-firm became invalid on change in its partnership without prior approval, whether a fresh licence application was before approval of the change in constitution could be considered, and whether rejection of renewal and imposition of penalty on a technical ground was justified.

Analysis: Section 52 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 provides that a firm's licence becomes invalid on a change in partnership unless the change is approved by the Administrator. The provision does not require prior approval before the change takes effect, nor does it prescribe that approval can be considered only if a fresh licence application is first made in the name of the new partnership. The reference to Section 103 was held irrelevant because it concerns transfer or transmission of business by intestate or testamentary succession, which was not the situation here. The firm had informed the department of the change and sought guidance, and there was no finding that the incoming partner was otherwise disqualified. Rejection of approval merely for non-filing in a prescribed form was therefore not justified.

Conclusion: The Collector's rejection of approval for the change in constitution and the consequential penalty were set aside, and the matter was remitted for reconsideration of the request for approval and, if granted, renewal of the licence.

---