Bombay High Court
Uttam
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Decided On:

Headnote:Sections 137, 138, 53, 139 and 143-Maharashtra Country Liquor Rules, 1973, Rule 43 and Partnership Act, 1932, Sections 41 and 43Country liquor licence-Inclusion of partner in licence by licensee-No benefit or claim can be derived by incoming partner was condition to grant permission for inclusion after death of original licensee-Dispute between partner resorted into dissolution of partnership by licensee Deletion of name of partner by excise authorities-Order set aside by Secretary, Home Department-Order without reason-Revision cannot be sustained.-If any civil rights are there in the parties and if anybodys civil right is prejudicially affected, then it would be only of the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 could have resorted to appropriate remedy. The question of deciding any civil rights either by the Collector or the Commissioner does not arise as the authority concerned has decided the matter well within the compass of the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act and the Rules framed there under. Court do not find that the order passed by the respondent No. 1- Secretary can be said to be worthy of being sustained in law. No justifiable reasons have been given by the respondent No. 1 to upset and set aside the well reasoned orders passed by the Excise Authorities below. The order passed by the respondent No.1 is based on extraneous considerations and on fat stretched facts. In the circumstances, Court have no hesitation in observing that the order passed by the respondent No.1 is per se illegal and against law.

       For Citation : 1999 MCR 596 (Bom)