Case Law Details
Teszla Multi Trade Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)
Introduction: The Gujarat High Court has intervened in the case of Teszla Multi Trade, which received a Show Cause Notice for registration cancellation. The court observed that, despite the issuance of an advisory wrongly stating the cancellation, a decision on the suspension is pending. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the court’s directives, the legal provisions invoked, and the urgency for a prompt resolution.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Show Cause Notice and Suspension: Teszla Multi Trade found itself facing a Show Cause Notice for the cancellation of its registration on 13.12.2022. Simultaneously, the registration was suspended from that day. The petitioner sought clarification on the basis for the fraud allegation leading to the registration cancellation.
2. Legal Reference – Rule 21A Sub-Rules (2) & (2-A): Avinash Poddar, the petitioner’s counsel, invoked Rule 21A sub-rules (2) & (2-A), emphasizing that the suspension decision must be made within 30 days of issuing the notice. However, almost a year has passed, and no final decision on the registration cancellation has been reached.
3. Gujarat High Court’s Directive: The High Court issued a notice to the respondents, returnable on 12.2023, directing them to make a decision on whether the suspension of Teszla Multi Trade’s registration should be continued. The court emphasized the need for a speaking order, ensuring transparency and clarity in the decision-making process.
4. Restraining Advisory Issuance: The court took note of an advisory issued by the respondents wrongly stating the cancellation of registration. In response, the respondents are restrained from issuing such advisories that could mislead stakeholders. The directive ensures that accurate information is communicated.
Conclusion: The Gujarat High Court’s intervention in the Teszla Multi Trade case brings attention to the delay in deciding the suspension of registration. The court’s directive for a prompt decision emphasizes the importance of procedural efficiency. As the legal proceedings unfold, stakeholders await a transparent resolution, and the court’s involvement ensures a fair examination of the matter. The article underscores the significance of adherence to legal timelines and the need for accurate communication to prevent misinformation.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT
It appears that the petitioner has been issued Show Cause Notice for cancellation of registration on 13.12.2022. In the meantime, the registration of the petitioner has been suspended with effect from that day. The petitioner on 13.12.2022 has requested for clarification from the respondents as to why the authority came to conclusion that the registration has been obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. The reply has also been filed on 13.12.2022.
Meantime, it appears that the respondents have issued “ADVISORY” to the clients or parties which the petitioner is dealing with, inter alia stating that registration of the petitioner has been cancelled. This is not so.
2. Avinash Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on Rule 21A sub-rule (2) & (2-A) thereof to indicate that once Notice is issued, the question of suspension has to be decided within a period of 30 days. No decision has yet been taken on the issue whether the petitioner’s registration is required to be cancelled. Almost a year has gone by.
3. Issue Notice to the respondents, returnable on 12.2023. On or before the returnable date, respondents are directed to take a decision on the question whether the suspension of petitioner’s registration needs to be continued or not. Speaking order shall be passed.
Respondents are also restrained from issuing such kind of Advisory that they have issued to one Vijay Traders on 20.09.2023 intimating cancellation of registration, which in fact, is not so. Direct service is permitted.
