JUDGMENT -BOBDE S.A., J.:---This petition is directed against the order dated 31st October, 1988 passed by the Collector, Pune. By the impugned order the Collector, Pune, has directed that the license in Form F.L. II be transferred in the name of the widow of the original licensee. The original licensee was one Balkrishna Ramchandra Wadkar. His widow is Smt. Shobha Balkrishna Wadkar, the respondent No. 4 herein.

2. The licence in question that in Form F.L. II was issued by the Collector, Pune in the year 1973 in the name of Balkrishna Ramchandra Wadkar. He entered into a partnership on 12th July, 1979 with Suryakant and Baburao, the petitioners herein. The petitioners were recognised as partners under Rule 40 of the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953, the relevant extract reads as follows:---

"40. Regulation of business of licensee.---(1) No person shall be recognised as partner of the holder of a vendor's licence for the purposes of his licence, unless the partnership has been declared to the Collector before the licence is granted and the names of the partners have been entered jointly in the licence or if the partnership is entered into after the granting of the licence, unless the Collector agrees on application made to him, to alter the licence and to add the name or names of the partner or partners in the licence:

(1-A) Except with the previous sanction of the Collector, no person recognised as partner under sub-rule (1) shall be allowed to withdraw from the partnership and to have his name as partner deleted from the licence.

(2)(a) Subject to the provisions of Clause (b), a holder of a vendor's licence shall carry on his business under the licence either personally or by an agent or servant duly authorised by him in this behalf by a written nokarnama in Form F.L. XIV, signed by himself and counter-signed by a prohibition and excise officer not lower in rank than a Sub-Inspector:---

(b) ...............

(3) ...............

(4) ...............

(5) ...............

(6) ..............."

3. The licence was admittedly never issued in the joint names of the partners. Neither was it transferred in the joint names of partners in accordance with the Rule 40. The petitioners were only recognised as partners of the holder of a vendor's licence for the purpose of his licence. In other words, the names were only added as partners of the licence holder. There is no dispute that the licence was issued in the name of Balkrishna Wadkar and the names of the petitioners were merely added as partners under Rule 40.

4. On 23rd December, 1985 Balkrishna Wadkar expired. Thereafter, applications were made by his widow as well as the partners of her deceased husband for transferring the licence in their name. The widow i.e. respondent No. 4 prayed for a transfer of the licence in her name. The petitioners prayed for a transfer of the licence in their name.

5. These applications have been decided by the Collector by the impugned order dated 31st October, 1988. By the said order impugned in this petition the Collector has held that the partnership between Balkrishna Ramchandra Wadkar and the petitioners stood dissolved on the demise of Balkrishna Wadkar. Further the Collector held that he is competent to direct the issue of licence under Condition No. 8 of the licence in Form F.L. II read with Rule 61-A of the aforesaid Rule in the name of his widow, the respondent No. 1 herein. Condition No. 8 reads as follows:---

"8. The licensee, his heirs, legal representatives or assignees shall have no claim whatsoever to the continuance or renewal of this licence after the expiry of the period for which it is granted. It shall be entirely within the discretion of the Collector to permit or not the assignee of the licensee in case of sale or transfer of the heir or legal representative of the licensee, in case of death, to have the benefit of the licence for the unexpired portion of the term for which it is granted."

Rule 61-A of the said Rule as it stood on the dat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document