1. - By these four and other bunch of writ petitions, challenging the vires of the certain provisions of the Rajasthan Excise Act, the petitioners in the respective writ petitions have prayed for:

(a) appropriate writ, order or direction, incorporation of Section 54(Ka) and Sub-sections (4) to (9) in Section 69 of the Excise Act may be declared ultra vires and be struck down;

(b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction, amendment in the Excise Act, 1950 by incorporation of Section 9-B, may be declared ultra vires and be struck down;

(c) by a further appropriate, writ, order or direction impugned order dated, 16.5.2000, passed by respondent No. 2 may be declared invalid and may be quashed and set aside;

(d) Pending decision, if any further order is made or action is taken prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner, the same may also be quashed and set aside.

(e) Any other relief may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(f) Costs be awarded to the petitioners.

2. Briefly put the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners in this group of matters challenging the vires of the aforesaid provision have been that:

(a) the provisions of the Amendment are contrary to Article 254 of the Constitution of India and without the assent of the President, the same are ultravires;

(b) the amended provisions are repugnant to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Code of Civil Procedure;

(c) The amended provisions confer unguided powers on the Excise Authorities;

(d) By Section 9(B) the remedy of judicial review is taken away and the petitioner is remedyless.

3. The respondent State has contested the writ petition and has submitted the Rajasthan Excise Act is within the legislative competence of the State Government under Item-8 read with Items 64 and 65 of List-II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India and is a Special Act dealing with right of the State to regulate, production, transport, storage, possession and sale of liquor or intoxicating drug.

4. Identical writ petitions numbering 75 were filed before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur Bench raising the very same contentions by the petitioners and countered by the State of Rajasthan by filing reply to the same.

5. The Division Bench comprising of Hon'ble Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan Chief Justice and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Parihar, in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3267/2000, etc. and batch, decided on 8th August, 2001, dismissed the writ petitions holding that:

(a) the State Legislature is competent to enact the amended provisions to Section 54(Ka) and Sub-sections 4 to 9 in Section 69 of the Excise Act;

(b) the restrictions imposed are wholly against the larger public interest envisaged under the provisions of the constitution of India, which is essential to preserve the integrity and homogeneity of the country;

(c) the provisions under challenge are regulatory in the nature and they merely impose, if at all, reasonable and just restrictions in larger public interest, and

(d) that there is no merit whatsoever in the challenge to the provisions as being violative of Article 301 of the Constitution of India.

(e) that the amended provisions are not repugnant to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure, Indian Penal Code etc., and that the amended provisions are not contrary to Article 254 of the Constitution of India and the same are not ultravires.

6. A detailed order running to 53 pages was passed by the Division Bench holding as follows:

"We have given our thoughtful consideration to the entire arguments advanced by the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties with reference to the amended provisions of the Act. In our view by the amended provisions the rights of the citizens have not been curtailed. An alternative forum has been created under the Act and there is no illegality in the same. The Rajasthan Excise Act is an independent codified statute providing remedies for violation or contravention of any