Back
2021 Supreme(Del) 627
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
REKHA PALLI, J.
Pixie Enterprises Private Limited - Petitioner
Versus
Delhi International Airport Limited & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 9038 of 2021 & C.M. Appl. No. 28109 of 2021
Decided On : 22-10-2021
For the Petitioner: Mr. Dushyant Dave and Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Gautam Khazanchi, Mr. Pratibhanu Kharola, Ms. Neha and Ms. Sukanya Joshi, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Parag Tripathi, Mr. Maninder Singh & Mr. Tarun Gulati, Sr. Advs. with Ms. Anuradha Dutt, Mr. Anish Kapur, Ms. Suman Yadav, Ms. Divya Bhalla and Ms. Nikhita K. Suri, Advs., Mr. Rahul Mehra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Standing Counsel (Civil) GNCTD, Mr. Arun Panwar, Mr. Chaitanya Gosain and Mr. Siddharth Dwivedi, Advs., Mr. Vishal Dabas & Mr. Krishna Dayama, Advs., Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC.
Point of Law: Merely because the petitioner perceives these reasons to be arbitrary, it cannot be said that the impugned letter is unreasoned.
Headnote:
Airport Authority of India Act, 1994 - Sections 11, 12 & 12 A and (3) - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 and 14 - Delhi Excise Act, 2009 - Section 81 - Delhi Excise Rules, 2010 - Rule 32 - Power of high court to issue certain writs - Seeking quashing and setting aside of letter issued by respondent refusing to grant a ‘No Objection Certificate’ to petitioner to operate ten liquor vends at Indira Gandhi International Airport (Domestic Wing) Consequently, petitioner also seeks a direction to respondent to issue a NOC in its favour to enable it to obtain a licence from respondent for running these liquor vends - Whether respondent was justified in resorting to competitive bidding or whether respondent ought to resort to competitive bidding, but as to whether respondent can, without having taken any consent from respondent foist its choice on respondent or compel respondent to accept successful bidder declared by respondent in its competitive bidding.
Finding of the Court: Court Once respondent itself had made it clear that in case highest bidder is unable to obtain a NOC from respondent respondent will consider issuing a licence in favour of subsequent bidders, it is evident that respondent was also always aware that it could not thrust its choice upon respondent no Before Court must also deal with petitioner’s plea that respondent was obliged to give reasons while rejecting its request under impugned letter as also petitioner’s plea that respondent has now tried to give new reasons, including alleged unsatisfactory financial - Status of petitioner.- There can be no doubt that respondent was required to provide reasons for rejecting petitioner’s request - Court find that impugned letter issued by respondent clearly sets out reasons for rejecting petitioner’s request.- Respondent has specifically stated that it has subsisting contracts with a third party, and it has no additional space to accommodate petitioner –
Result: writ petition, dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Rekha Palli, J.
1. The present petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing and setting aside of letter dated 17.08.2021 issued by the respondent no.1, refusing to grant a “No Objection Certificate” (hereinafter referred to as “NOC”) to the petitioner to operate ten liquor vends at the Indira Gandhi International Airport (Domestic Wing) (hereinafter referred to as “IGI Airport” or “the Airport”). Consequently, the petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondent nos.1, 3 and 4 to issue a NOC in its favour to enable it to obtain a licence from respondent no.2 for running these liquor vends.
2. Pixie Enterprises Private Limited, the petitioner herein, is a Pondicherry based company, incorporated in 1998, which claims to have 20 years’ experience in manufacturing packaging products for the liquor industry in Pondicherry and Tamil Nadu. Delhi International Airport Limited/respondent no.1, operates and manages the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. The Department of Excise, Entertainment Tax & Luxury Tax, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi/respondent no.2, is the administrative Department of the Government of NCT of Delhi concerned with regulating excise related activities within the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The Airports Authority of India/respondent no.3 is a statutory body functioning under the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, under the Ministry of Civil Aviation/respondent no.4 and currently holds 26% shareholding in respondent no.1.
3. The Delhi Excise Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) came into effect from 04.10.2010, whereafter the Delhi Excise Rules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”) were notified by respondent no.2 by exercise of its powers under Section 81 of the Act empowering it to make rules inter alia “prescribing the authority by which, the form and the manner in which, and the terms and conditions, subject to which any licence, permit or pass shall be granted.” Under these Rules, it is open for the respondent no.2/GNCTD to determine as to whether the licences under the Act should be auctioned, tendered, or granted by any other procedure. The various categories of licences which could be issued are prescribed under Rule 32; the licence for “Retail vend of Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor in Shopping Malls and Shopping Complex at Airport" which is the subject matter of the present petition, has been classified as "L-10”.
4. On 17.07.2015, the respondent no.2 issued a public notice prescribing the terms and conditions for grant of L-10 licences, according to which, these licences were to be granted on a “first come first serve” basis. Accordingly, the retail liquor outlets in all the shopping malls in Delhi and the shopping complex at the IGI Airport were, ever since, being run on the basis of licences issued and renewed on an annual basis in pursuance of the said public notice.
5. On 16.03.2021, the respondent no.2, upon realizing that the finalization of the excise policy for the year 2021-2022, proposing to bring some radical changes in the manner of issuance of the licences was likely to take time, issued a circular informing the existing licence holders that subject to payment of pro-rata licence fee, they could seek renewal of their licence for a period of three months commencing from 01.04.2021, which period was, on 10.06.2021, extended till 30.09.2021. This circular permitting extension for a limited period was issued to ensure smooth and uninterrupted supply of liquor in Delhi, till the new excise policy was brought into force.
6. Subsequently, on 05.07.2021, the respondent no.2 published the Delhi Excise Policy for the year 2021-2022 (hereinafter referred to as “the new excise policy”) whereunder the framework for the grant of retail licences has been prescribed in Para 4.1.1, which reads as under:
“In view of the above, the framework for grant of retail licences shall be as under.
i. The number of
