SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Pat) 978

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA
S. Kumar, J.
M/s Riga Sugar – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Others – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16289 of 2017
Decided On : 09-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.Ashish Giri, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC

Headnote:

Bihar Excise Act, 1951 – Section 42(g)(h) (ii) – The Excise Commissioner holding the petitioner guilty for supply of sub-standard liquor on the basis of inspection of samples collected from BSBCL. Dept and accordingly directing for issuance of notices for payment of penalty in terms of Section 42(g)(h)(ii) – the impugned order was passed by the Excise Commissioner, whereas the authority prescribed by the Government for granting the licence, was the Collector and not the Commissioner – as such, impugned order quashed and matter remanded afresh to the authority prescribed, i.e. the Collector, who granted the licence – petition stands disposed of. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT :

1. Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):

    "i. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the demand dated 28.12.2015 issued under the Signature of the Collector, Muzaffarpur received by the petitioner on 21.10.2017 by which the petitioner has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs.98,06,513.00 as penalty under section42(g), (h)(ii) of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 for supply of sub standard liquor in terms of chemical examination report dated 08.08.2015. (Annexure-12).

ii. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the chemical examination report dated 08.08.2015 in relation to sample collected from BSBCL Depot., Sheohar. (Annexure-3).

iii. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 24.11.2015 bearing no. 3556 issued by the Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna holding petitioner guilty for supply of sub-standard liquor on the basis of inspection of samples collected from BSBCL Depot, Sheohar and accordingly directed for issuance of notice for payment of penalty in terms of section 42 (g) (h) (ii) (Annexure-6).

iv. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter no. 2749 dated 13.09.2017 issued under the signature of the Deputy Commissioner Excise, Bihar, Patna by which the Collector Muzaffarpur has been directed to take necessary steps for recovery of amount of Rs. 98,06,513.00 from the petitioner for causing revenue loss to the Government.

v. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter no. 1056 dated 15.09.2017 issued under the signature of Collector Muzaffarpur by which the petitioner in terms of letter no. 2749 dated 13.09.2017 has been directed to deposit Rs. 98,06,5 13.00 in the government treasury,

vi. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter no. 1152 dated 05.10.2017 issued under the Signature of Superintendent of Excise, Muzaffarpur by which the petitioner in terms of letter no. 2749 dated 13.09.2017 has been directed to deposit Rs. 98,06,513.00 in the government treasury failing which necessary action will be taken.

vii. To hold and declare that the entire demand holding the petitioner guilty of supplying substandard liquor based on an ex-parte inspection dated 08.08.2015 is violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and also wholly without jurisdiction.

viii. To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner to operate its distillery situated at Riga without any hindrance.

ix. To issue appropriate interim/ex-parte interim order staying the operation of the impugned demands and/or prevent the authorities from taking any coercive steps for recovery of the said amount.

x. To issue any other relief for which the petitioner is entitled for."

2. The short point which arises for consideration is as to whether the authority passing the impugned order dated 24.11.2015 vide letter No.3556, was empowered under the provisions of Bihar Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to pass such an order or not.

3. It is not in dispute that the impugned order dated 24.11.2015 was passed by Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna vide No.3556 (Annexure-6). Also, it is not in dispute that under the Statute, i.e. Section 42 of the Act, the authority prescribed by the Government who granted the licence, was the Collector and not the Commissioner. It is under these circumstances, we are inclined to interfere and remand the matter afresh to the authority prescribed, i.e. the Collector, who had granted the licence.

4. Today, there is no dispute of the identity of such authority.

5. As such, we quash the impugned order dated 24.11.2015 passed by Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna with direction to the parties to appear before the Colle

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top