( 1 ) THIS letters patent appeal has been filed against the order dated August 4, 1972 of a learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellants for quashing certain orders of the Excise authorities as a result whereof the appellants were refused renewal of their L-1 licence for the whole-sale and retail vend to the trade of foreign liquor. In January, 1967 the appellants were granted the aforesaid licence under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, hereinafter REFERRED TO to as "the Act", as in force in Delhi. On or about June 6, 1970, the godowns of the appellants and the houses of some of its officers were raided and searched by the Police and the Excise authorities. It is alleged that four wooden boxes containing drums which contained about 180 1bs. of rectified spirit were recovered and it was also found that the liquor in stock was short by 1-1/2 bottles than what it should have been according to the stock register. A case was registered on June 7, 1970 with the Sadar Bazar Polite Station against the appellants under section 61 of the Act which provides a penalty for, inter alia, unlawful possession of any intoxicant. A few days later, a notice was issued to the appellants under section 36 of the Act as to why their licence be not cancelled or suspended but proceedings in pursuance of this notice were stayed by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi pending the disposal of the aforesaid criminal case under section 61 of the Act.

( 2 ) BECAUSE the grant of such licence is for a year commencing on April 1 and expiring on March 31 in the next year, the appellants on January 1, 1971 applied to the Collector, who is the competent authority in this behalf, for a renewal of the licence for the year commencing April 1, 1971. On January 14, 1971 the Collector issued a notice under rule 5. 12 of the Delhi Excise Manual, Volume II, stating that he did not propose to renew the appellants licence. The relevant part of this rule provides :-

"5. 12. Whenever it is proposed not to renew a licence granted on a fixed fee, the authority competent to renew it shall give notice to the holder of such licence, record objections, if any, put forward by the licensee, and pass a definite order in writing. The licensee may be given, on application, an authenticated copy of such order. Except with the special sanction of the Lt. Governor no such order of non-renewal shall be made after January 20th in respect of licences for the following financial year. . . . "in compliance with this rule, the Collector gave an opportunity to the appellants of being heard personally or through authorised agent and fixed the hearing for January 18, 1971. The reasons for the issuance of the notice were stated therein thus:-

"whereas unauthorised rectified spirit was recovered from your godown on the night of 6th/7th June, 1970 and criminal proceedings in respect thereof are pending in a court of law under section 61-1-14 of the Punjab Excise Act (1914) as extended to Union Territory of Delhi; and whereas, show cause notices for cancellation/suspension of your licence have already been issued and no final orders have been passed thereon by competent authority; now, therefore, in exercise of the powers vested in me under rule 5. 12 of Delhi Excise Manual, Volume II, I propose not to renew L. 1 licence held by you. "

( 3 ) THE appellants appeared before the Collector and asked for time. On January 20, 1971 the Collector finally passed an order that the licence held by the appellants shall not be renewed for the coming financial year 1971-72. It appears that during the proceedings before him, the appellants requested for adjournments more than once but the Collector did not acceed to these requests and adjourned the proceedings only on one occasion and that too only for a day. Against the order of the Collector, the appellants filed an appeal before the Excise Commissioner. By his order dated February 10, 1971 the Excise Commissioner set aside th