R.Narender vs. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation And Another

Facts

The petitioner, a licensee of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC), challenged a termination order dated May 27, 2022, issued by respondent No. 2, the Divisional Manager of TSRTC. This order terminated the petitioner's license without prior notice. Previously, the petitioner, along with others, had approached the High Court in Writ Petition No. 20058 of 2022, challenging similar termination notices. An interim order dated April 21, 2022, in that petition, allowed suspension of notices subject to specific payments of license fees and GST for certain months. The petitioner claimed to have paid the full license fee for January 2022, exceeding the 50% stipulated in the interim order, and sought adjustment of this excess towards the March 2022 license fee. Despite a representation for adjustment, the termination order was passed without notice or hearing.

Held

The Court held that the termination order dated May 27, 2022, was unsustainable. The Court noted from the statement of account that the petitioner had paid the entire license fee for January 2022 and the full license fee for February 2022. The interim order required only 50% of the January license fee. If this excess payment was adjusted towards the March 2022 license fee, there would be no outstanding license fee for March. While the petitioner did have dues towards maintenance, electricity, water charges, and GST for January to March 2022, and for April 2022, the petitioner's counsel fairly stated willingness to clear these dues. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned termination order, subject to the petitioner clearing the outstanding amounts of approximately Rs. 95,000/- for January-March 2022 and Rs. 7,752/- for April 2022 within specified timelines, and also clearing the entire dues for May 2022. The petitioner was also directed to continue paying future dues as per the agreement. The ratio decidendi is that a termination order passed without considering a party's representation for adjustment of payments, especially when such adjustment would negate the alleged default, and without affording an opportunity of hearing, violates principles of natural justice and the court's earlier orders.

Key Issues

1. Whether the termination order dated May 27, 2022, passed by respondent No. 2 is contrary to the interim order dated April 21, 2022, passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in Writ Petition No. 20058 of 2022, and opposed to the principles of natural justice? Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that they had paid the entire license fee for January 2022, which was more than the 50% required by the interim order. They contended that this excess should be adjusted towards the March 2022 license fee. Despite submitting a representation for this adjustment, respondent No. 2 proceeded to pass the termination order without notice or an opportunity to be heard, violating the court's earlier order and natural justice principles. Revenue/State's contentions: The respondent contended that the petitioner had not complied with the interim order dated April 21, 2022. Specifically, they claimed the petitioner paid only half of the license fee for March 2022 and failed to pay other charges like GST, maintenance, and electricity. Even if the excess January payment was adjusted, the petitioner still owed approximately Rs. 95,000/- towards GST, electricity, maintenance, and water charges for January to March 2022, and amounts for April and May 2022.