Omwati Sonkar vs Excise Commissioner State Of
2025 Latest Caselaw 3363 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Omwati Sonkar vs Excise Commissioner State Of on 27 June, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
            Writ Petition No. 1818 of 2025 (M/S)
Omwati Sonkar                                          ..........Petitioner

                                      Vs.

Excise Commissioner State of
Uttarakhand Dehradun and Others                      ........ Respondents
Present :   Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State

                                JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to the

followings:-

(i) Minutes of the meeting of the District Level Road Safety Committee, Dehradun dated 27.03.2025 to the extent it directs the shifting of the Indian Made Foreign Liquor Shop, i.e. GMS Road, Dehradun.

(ii) Order dated 13.05.2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Dehradun, by which four liquor shops were directed to be shifted.

(iii) Order dated 17.05.2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Dehradun, by which the petitioner's Indian Made Foreign Liquor Shop was directed to be shifted.

(iv) Order dated 09.06.2025, passed by the Excise Commissioner, State of Uttarakhand, whereby, the appeal, preferred by the petitioner, has been rejected. And;

(v) Order dated 09.06.2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Dehradun, by which the petitioner has been given time till 30.06.2025 to shift the Indian Made Foreign Liquor Shop.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. Petitioner had earlier challenged the action of

District Level Road Safety Committee, District Dehradun,

and the order of the District Magistrate, Dehradun dated

13.05.2025 and 17.05.2025 in WPMS No.1505 of 2025,

Omwati Sonkar Vs. District Magistrate, Dehradun, ("the

first petition") which was dismissed as withdrawn with

the liberty to seek appropriate remedy before appropriate

forum. Thereafter, the petitioner did file appeal before the

Excise Commissioner, which has been decided by the

order dated 09.06.2025, pursuant to which, the District

Magistrate, Dehradun, had further granted time to shift

the Indian Made Foreign Liquor Shop till 30.06.2025.

4. At the very outset, learned State Counsel

submits that there is a statutory remedy under Section

11(2) of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 ("the Act"). Therefore,

the writ petition may not be entertained.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

on 23.05.2025, this Court had passed an order in the first

petition giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer against

the order impugned then, with further directions that the

order impugned in the first petition shall not come into

effect till 27.05.2025; the petitioner did file appeal on

26.05.2025, but it was neither registered nor taken up,

nor the date was promptly informed to the petitioner, and

on 07.06.2025, in the morning, her Indian Made Foreign

Liquor Shop was closed. Thereafter, the order in the

appeal was passed, which has not addressed to all the

issues that were raised by the petitioner in the appeal. He

further submits that even if now the petitioner prefers a

revision under Section 11(2) of the Act, it may get the

same fate; no hearing; no date; and it would remain

pending for a long. He also submits that the petitioner

would prefer a revision on 30.06.2025, till the period he

has been given time to shift the shop, but he requests

that the respondent-authorities may be directed to at

least take up the matter and the interim relief application

may be decided on the same date.

6. Learned State Counsel submits that if a

revision is filed by 10:30 AM on 30.06.2025, the matter

shall be taken up and the interim relief application shall

be heard on that date.

7. The Court takes on record the statement given

by learned State Counsel.

8. Since the petitioner has alternate statutory

remedy, by way of filing a revision under Section 11(2) of

the Act, the writ petition may not be entertained. The writ

petition stands disposed of, accordingly.

9. However, if the petitioner files a revision by

10:30 AM on 30.06.2025, the competent authority shall

take up the matter and hear the interim relief application

on the same date.

10. Let a certified copy of this judgment be

supplied to learned counsel for the parties, today itself, on

payment of usual charges.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 27.06.2025 Ravi Bisht