The District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal vs Sri L.P. Naithani, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner

the State Sri K.P. Upadhyaya submitted that the show cause notice was given and the reply was submitted by the petitioner and thereafter the cancellation order was passed therefore the reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the show cause notice given to the petitioner did not refer the inspection made behind him which was the basis to hold the contravention of condition of lease and the inspection report thereon was never supplied to him therefore non-supply of the said documents itself establishes that no reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioner. In view of the above, it is clear that no reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioner before cancellation of the lease deed. Therefore, the order of cancellation of lease deed of the petitioner is contrary to the provisions contained in Rule 60 of the Rules and cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Accordingly, the order dated 12.3.2003 passed by District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal is hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed. However, it is open for the respondents to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. No order as to costs. (B.S. Verma, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.)

19.07.2006 Rajeev Dang