WPMS/1366/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 2503 UK

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
              AT NAINITAL
              ON THE 20th DAY OF JULY, 2021

                             BEFORE:

     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI


           Writ Petition (M/S) No.1366 of 2021

BETWEEN:

     Bhupal Arya                                 .....Petitioner

       (Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate)


AND:

     Collector/District Magistrate Dehradun and Ors.
                                        .....Respondents


       (Mr.   T.S.   Phartiyal,  Addl. C.S.C.  for  the   State  of
       Uttarakhand/respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. V.K. Kaparwan,
       Advocate for respondent no.4)




                           JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner was granted licence for retail sale of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. Pursuant to said licence, he set up a shop at Rajpur Road-3 (near Gandhi Park), Dehradun. Subsequently, on his application, he was permitted to shift the shop to some other place, which is about 500 mtrs. away from the earlier shop, by the District Excise Officer, vide order dated 09.07.2021. Respondent no.4, who is a licensee in respect of some other shop at Rajpur Road-1 (near R.T.O.), challenged the order

of shifting, before the Excise Commissioner. The Excise Commissioner, vide order dated 15.07.2021, has stayed the order of shifting passed in favour of the petitioner and has posted the appeal for further hearing on 24.07.2021.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by Excise Commissioner on 15.07.2021 has the effect of closing down the shop of the petitioner, inasmuch as, petitioner has vacated the earlier shop, which was taken on rent by him. He further submits that the order of stay was passed by the Excise Commissioner without notice to the petitioner and further that the stay order was passed after execution of the order of shifting passed by the District Excise Officer.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the terms of licence, petitioner is obliged to pay about ` 60.00 Lakhs as minimum monthly guarantee duty to the Excise Department, besides licence fee and various other charges. Thus, according to him, petitioner would be liable to pay various charges/duties even for the period during which his shop remains closed.

5. Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. V.K. Kaparwan, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4 submit that petitioner has filed application for vacation of stay before the Excise

Commissioner, therefore, he is not entitled to any relief in this writ petition.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Excise Commissioner to decide the Stay Vacation Application filed by the petitioner in the appeal filed by respondent no.4 on the next date fixed i.e. 24.07.2021 or any other date within one week thereafter. For a period of two weeks or till disposal of Stay Application, whichever is earlier, order dated 15.07.2021 passed by the Excise Commissioner shall be kept in abeyance.

7. Let a certified copy of this order be issued today itself.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Rajni