Amit Masanta & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 5474 Cal

05.10.2021.

Ct. No.13
 Sl. 3
  sp                          W.P.A. No. 3624 of 2020
                                Amit Masanta & Ors.
                                        Versus
                           The State of West Bengal & Ors.

                            (Through Video Conference)

                    Mr. Soumak Bera
                                                   ...for the petitioners.

                    Mr. Raja Saha,
                    Mr. Debasish Ghosh
                                                         ..for the State.

Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken

on record.

The principal subject matter of this application

is a notification dated 27th December, 2019 whereby

Rule 4(Q) of the West Bengal Excise (Selection of Sites

and Grant of License for Retail Sale of liquor and other

Intoxicants) Rules, 2003 was revoked. The said Rule

was introduced in the year 2019. By the reason of

such Rule, a licence for a limited period was granted to

sell on a retail basis all categories of liquor except Tari

and Pachwai. It is submitted that the said licence

which the petitioners were enjoying, was initially

suspended by reason of a notification of the Election

Commission of India.

Upon reconsideration after the expiry of the

E.C.I. notification at the behest of the orders of this

Court, the Excise Authorities in Bengal have felt the

need to revoke any rights under 4(Q) of the aforesaid

Rules.

Mr. Bera, learned advocate appearing for the

petitioners submits that revocation of an existing

licence unilaterally by the State and that too while

considering revival of an existing licence should have

been informed with reasons.

Reliance is placed on the decision of the

Supreme Court in the case of Internet and Mobile

Association of India vs. Reserve Bank of India

reported in (2020) 10 SCC 274. By reference to

paragraph 174 of the said judgment, Mr. Bera would

argue that there may be a presumption of collateral

purpose when no reasons are provided while

withdrawing the circular.

This Court is of the view that the facts and

circumstances of the case Internet Mobile

Association of India (supra) are quite different from

that of the power exercised by the State under the

aforesaid Bengal Excise Rules in the impugned

notification.

It is now a well-settled principle of

Administrative Law that there is a presumption of

reasons behind a policy decision either to introduce a

right or to revoke the same, particularly, in the context

of goods that are monitored by the Excise Authority.

Such presumption continues until the contrary is

demonstrated. While a benefit derived on the basis of a

policy decision is revoked, no prejudice can be claimed

as no vested right as accrued to the petitioners in the

first place.

This Court sees that the revocation of 4(Q) is

neither arbitrary nor capricious. There are reasons

apparent, inter alia, is that, indiscriminate sale of all

categories of liquor is sought to be controlled and

regulated by the State for the health and well being of

the people.

With the aforesaid object, the impugned

circulation cannot be faulted. The writ petition must,

therefore, fail and is thereby dismissed.

However, since the writ petitioners have been at

one point of time granted a benefit under 4(Q) albeit

non existent today, they shall be entitled to apply for

fresh licence at their existing cites or otherwise, upon

full compliance with all required formalities afresh. If

such application is made within a period of 10 days

from date, the Authorities shall consider and dispose

of the same in accordance with the applicable rules

and law within a period of three months thereafter.

There shall be no order as to costs.

All parties are directed to act on a server copy of

this order duly downloaded from the official website of

this Court.

(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)