Allahabad High Court
Hira Lal vs State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. ... on 3 August, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1005389 of 2011
Petitioner :- Hira Lal
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Excise Bapu Bhawan Lko. An
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dileep Kumar Pathak
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the husband of the petitioner was license holder of a shop allotted to him. The allegation was that the husband of the petitioner could not lift the Minimum Guarantee Quota for the month of May, 2002, as such, a recovery was initiated against him alleging that the government has suffered a loss of Rs.2,21,400/- and the same was to be recovered as arrears of land revenue. It is, thus, claimed that the husband of the petitioner preferred an appeal which was dismissed and the revision was also dismissed against which the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.605 (MS) of 2006. This Court vide order dated 16.02.2006 passed in the said writ petition remanded the matter for decision in terms of the order passed in Revision No.9 of 2003 and Revision No.10 of 2004. It is stated that in terms of the said order, the matter was remanded with directions, however, without considering the said directions, the revision has been dismissed again.
It is informed at the Bar that the petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petition and has been substituted by his wife.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of the provisions of the Act as well as the license, the dues are payable by the license holder and the liability cannot be fastened on the legal heirs of the license holder. He further argues that even otherwise this Court in the case of Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. - 2012 (8) ADJ 1 (DB) has held as under:
".....
62. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the reliefs are moulded. A writ in the nature of certiorari is issued quashing the order contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition and the circular dated 09.03.2009 contained in Annexure 10 to the writ petition consequential benefit.
A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to refund the security deposited by the petitioner forthwith say, within a period of two months.
A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the State Government to consider and take appropriate steps by making necessary changes in the statutory provisions with regard to MGQ and other provisions under which the sale of liquor is encourage and licencees are compelled to lift the sell the liquor to fulfill the quota which is increased every year keeping in view the observations made in the body of present judgment.
No orders as to costs."
In the light of the said it is argued that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered on the second argument by the judgment in the case of Rakesh Singh (supra).
Learned Standing Counsel argues that against the said judgment passed in Rakesh Singh's case (supra), the State has preferred an SLP being S.L.P. No.32915 of 2012 in which an interim order has been passed on 09.11.2012 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court staying the order only to the extent it directs refund of the security amount.
Considering the fact that the issue is squarely covered with respect to the second argument by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is allowed on the same terms and conditions as contained in the judgment of this Court in the case of Rakesh Singh (supra) and as followed in the case of Jai Prakash Tiwari v. State of U.P. & Ors. - Writ Petition No.5401 (MS) of 2011 decided on 08.10.2012.
Impugned orders dated 28.07.2011 (Annexure - 1) and 20.07.2005 (Annexure - 4) are hereby quashed.
The issue with regard to the refund of the security shall be considered after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid SLP for which the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh petition if so advised.
Order Date :- 3.8.2022
nishant
