Delhi High Court
W.P.(C)/2596/2024 of SSRA AND CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. on 24 September 2026
Page 1 of 3 $~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010080882024 + W.P.(C) 2596/2024 & CM APPL. 10694/2024 SSRA AND CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Amit George, Mr. Nitesh Mehra, Mr. Zubin M. John, Ms.Medhavi Bhatia, Mr.Vaibhav Gandhi, Mr. Arnav
$~32
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010080882024
+
W.P.(C) 2596/2024 & CM APPL. 10694/2024
SSRA AND CO. CHARTERED
ACCOUNTANT
.....Petitioner
Through:
Dr. Amit George, Mr. Nitesh
Mehra, Mr. Zubin M. John,
Ms.Medhavi
Bhatia,
Mr.Vaibhav Gandhi, Mr. Arnav
Bhansali, Mr. Adhiswar Suri,
Ms. Muskan Shalya, Ms.Rupam
Jha, Ms. Tanushree Gupta,
Mr.Kartikay
Puneesh,
Mr.Dushyant
K.
Kaul
and
Mr.Amal, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Himanshu Pathak, Mr.
Mohit Gupta and Mr. Kunal
Rai, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
24.09.2026
1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the orders dated 29.03.2023 and 06.04.2023 (‘impugned order’), passed by Respondent No.2/Warehousing Development and Regulatory Authority, Government of India, thereby cancelling the empanelment of the petitioner for warehouse inspection on an anonymous complaint.
2. The impugned order was passed after issuing a show cause notice dated 25.02.2022, which reads as under:
3. It is apparent that by the show cause notice, the respondent had asked for an explanation stating that one of the inspecting officers of the petitioner has been reported to be asking of pecuniary benefits from the warehouse seeking registration with the Respondent No. 2.
4. In the opinion of this Court, the content of the show cause notice are not such that could have elicited an effective response as the same does not furnish any details regarding the foundation of allegations or the material relied upon.
5. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein certain allegations against the petitioner have been made. It is the submitted that anonymous complaint was received regarding the employee(s) of the petitioner demanding illegal gratification and an audio recording was also sent to the department, which was further verified from one forensic laboratory.
6. The above material, forming the very basis of the impugned action, concededly was not provided to the petitioner so as to enable them to file appropriate reply to the show cause notice.
7. Considering the above, the impugned order(s) are suspended and the respondents are directed to pass an order afresh, after providing the material to the petitioner, which the respondents had relied upon to take the action, and afford the petitioner an opportunity to file reply. The respondent shall also grant an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner before passing an order. This exercise is expected to be completed within a period of 6 weeks from date.
8. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. AMIT MAHAJAN, J SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 DU