Judgment

KASLIWAL, J.:- Special leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Patna High Court dated 6th September, 1991. Initially Mohd. Fida Karim and Dasrath Das had filed special leave petition challenging the dismissal of their writ petition, C.W.J.C. No. 2102 of 1991 by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court by order dated 6th September, 1991. In view of the fact by a common decision, the Patna High Court had dismissed many other identical writ petitions, the petitioners in those other writ petitions also submitted intervention applications before this Court and such intervention applications have been allowed. 35 applicants/interveners are also supporting the present appeal filed by Mohd. Fida Karim and Dasrath Das.

3. The controversy in this case relates to the mode of settlement of the right of vend of country liquor, Indian made foreign liquor and spiced country liquor under the provisions of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as the Excise Act) and Rules framed thereunder. The Government changed its policy from time to time. Prior to 1984, settlement of country liquor shops was done by renewing the licence according to the sliding scale of system. In 1984, the State Government decided to make settlement of country liquor shops by public auction. This was done on annual basis for a period commencing from 1 st of April to 31st March of the next following year. This practice continued up to 1989-90. During the currency of the above licensing period 1989-90, the state Government appointed a high power committee and according to its recommendations made a policy to make settlement of liquor shops for five years by renewing the existing licences, subject to fulfilling certain conditions like, satisfactory record of performance and enhancement of licence fee at the rate of 10 percent every year and also enhancement of the minimum guaranteed quota at the rate of 5 per cent every year. The above policy decision was taken by a Cabinet Memorandum dated 25th January, 1990. In pursuance to the above policy decision, the Excise Commissioner by communication dated 8th February, 1990 informed the licensing authorities to take steps for settlement of excise shops as per the amended policy of the Government. On 17th February, 1990, necessary amendments were also made in the Rules framed under S. 89 of the Excise Act in consonance with the new policy of the Government. The amendments were duly published in the official Gazette on 7th March, 1990, to come into force with effect from 1st April, 1990. The case of the appellants is that in pursuance to the aforesaid policy, the appellants agreed to the new terms and conditions and necessary agreements were also executed. The appellants also deposited six months licence fee for the first year of settlement, on 7th March, 1990. According to the appellants a concluded contract came into effect on 7th March, 1990 itself, which was to come into force with effect from 1st April, 1990.

4. Some of the persons not satisfied with the aforesaid Government policy, challenged the same by filing four writ petitions in the High Court. The High Court passed interim orders on 9th March, 23rd March and 13th April, 1990 in these writ petitions. The High Court in the interim orders granted stay on the new policy of the Government and in its place gave directions to grant the licence on yearly basis through public auction. Initially, it was directed that the period of such settlements shall not exceed four months, but subsequently it was made on monthly basis. It was also directed that the aforesaid orders will not stand in the way of the State Government in reviewing the policy decision. We have only mentioned the substance of such interim orders passed on 9-3-1990, 23-3-1990 and 13-4-1990, as the same have been quoted in extenso by the High Court in its impugned order dated 6th September, 1991. It appears that the aforesaid interim orders were passed by the High Court