1. The petitioner has called into question the second respondent's letter, dated 15.06.2006 (Annexure-B), according the prior permission for the transfer of CL-2 licence to the respondent No.6. He has also challenged the third respondent's order, dated 17.06.2006 (Annexure-C), transferring the CL-2 licence to the respondent No.6. He has also sought a direction for the re-transfer of CL-2 licence to the petitioner.

2. Sri S.V. Angadi, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's signatures were obtained on some papers by way of manipulation. The petitioner never intended to transfer CL-2 licence to the respondent No.6. He submits that he had obtained copies of certain documents under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and in that process there is some delay in filing the appeal before the Excise Commissioner. He submits that the order, dated 06.01.2011 passed in W.P.No.14014/2010 reserves the liberty to the petitioner to avail of the remedy of filing the appeal before the Excise Commissioner.

3. Sri K..A. Ariga, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that there is full compliance with the requirement