Explosives Licence Suspension | Uploading Order On Online Portal Not Valid Service, Must Be Sent By Post: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has set aside the suspension of an explosives dealer's licence, holding that an order suspending or revoking a licence under the Explosives Rules 2008 must be served in the manner prescribed under Rule 118(3) which contemplates service by post at the address of the licensee.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq held that uploading the suspension order on the Petroleum and...
The Madras High Court has set aside the suspension of an explosives dealer's licence, holding that an order suspending or revoking a licence under the Explosives Rules 2008 must be served in the manner prescribed under Rule 118(3) which contemplates service by post at the address of the licensee.
Justice Mohammed Shaffiq held that uploading the suspension order on the Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO) web portal could not constitute valid service in the absence of any statutory provision permitting such a mode of service.
“In that view of the matter, since there has no valid service rather service in the manner prescribed under the Act, the impugned order is set aside,” the court held disposing the writ petition.
The case arose from an order of the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives, PESO dated dated April 1 suspending the license of the petitioner, a licensed explosive dealer. The petitioner challenged the order, which had been uploaded on the web portal, on the ground that there was no service in the manner contemplated under the Explosives Acts and Rules.
The Court referred to the relevant Rule 118(3) under Explosive Rules, which says, “An order of suspension or revocation of a license shall be deemed to have been served if sent by post to the address of the licensee entered in the licence.”
“It would be clear that any suspension or revocation of license ought to be made by post to the address of the licensee,” the Court said.
Rejecting the respondent's argument that the petitioner was aware of the online process and should have checked the license status online, the Court noted that the respondent authority has failed to show a provision which enabled them to serve by uploading on the web portal
“To the contrary, 118(3) appears to indicate that the only mode of service which is contemplated is through post,” the Court observed.
The Court noted that there was no evidence that the respondent served the impugned order by post, as submitted by the petitioner.
It thus set aside the order and allowed the respondent authority to initiate proceedings as per law.
The petitioner, a licensed explosive dealer, has been carrying out the business since 2006. He challenged the order suspending his license, dated April 1, 2026, on the limited ground that there was no service in the manner contemplated under the Explosives Acts and Rules. The Rules contemplate service by post, however, the order was uploaded on the web portal.
On the other hand, the respondent authorities contended that as the licenses are issued via online module to the applicant's registered mobile number, the petitioner was aware about the online process. Thus, he should have checked the status of his license online, the respondent submitted.
Case: R Balaraman v Joint Chief Controller Of Explosives Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization & others,
WP No. 18358 of 2026 and WMP.Nos.19726, 19727 of 2026