Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
DINESH MEHTA, J.
Devi Lal - Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through Excise Commissioner and Others - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6896 of 2021
Decided On : 25-05-2021
Rajasthan Excise Rules, 1956 – Rule 74(v) – Rajasthan Excise Act, 1955 – Section 9A – Grant of license – Granting license to such bidders – Granted license of composite liquor shop of Group to respondent No. 4 – Held, Court would hasten to add that orders of other districts are not on record – As a matter of fact, respondent - State has placed various orders of different District Excise Officers, which do not contain such stipulation – Even if similar stipulations have been stringed in blacklisting orders, same are contrary to statutory provision and what has been held here – Commissioner (Excise) would ensure that henceforth rights of such defaulting bidders, who have been black-listed, be not protected – Needless to observe that present order will, however, not affect already crystallized rights of parties who are not before this Court – Application disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
DINESH MEHTA, J.
By way of the present writ petition, petitioner has challenged the action of the District Excise Officer, the respondent No. 3, who granted license of composite liquor shop of Group Kohina & Sayaran to the respondent No. 4.
2. The facts appertain, are set out hereinfra:—
(2.2) In furtherance of the policy aforesaid, an invitation dated 06.04.2021 to take part in e-auction came to be published giving out relevant terms and conditions of e-auction for grant of license.
(2.3) The controversy at hand relates to two groups/locations - (i) Tara Nagar and; (ii) Kohina and Sayaran of District Churu (hereinafter referred to as Location-I and Location-II respectively).
(2.4) For the purpose of clarity of facts, the relevant dates and amounts in relation to composite licence for both the locations are reproduced as under:—
|
| Location-I Tara Nagar | Location-II Kohina & Sayaran |
| Date of NIT | 06.04.2021 | 06.04.2021 |
| Date of auction | H1-Surendra Singh – (Rs.6,15,19,440/-) H2-Dinesh Kumar – (Rs.4,16,14,440/-) H3-Vinit Kaswan – (Rs.3,96,69,440/-) | H1-Nagendra Singh – (Rs.4,00,33,600/-) H2-Surendra Singh – (Rs.67,33,600/-) H3-Devi Lal – (Rs.67,28,600/-) |
| Date by which H1 was required to make payment | 16.04.2021 | 16.04.2021 |
(2.6) The petitioner herein was H-3 or third highest bidder for Location-II (Kohina & Sayaran) offering a bid of Rs. 67,28,600/-.
(2.7) The respondent No. 3 issued a letter dated 11.04.2021 to respondent No. 4, who was H-1 for Location-I asking him to deposit an amount of Rs. 6,15,195/- by 16.04.2021 and 5% of the bid amount to the tune of Rs. 30,75,972/- by 20.04.2021.
(2.8) The petitioner addressed a letter dated 12.04.2021 to the respondent No. 3 that in case H-1 for Location-II (Kohina & Sayaran) does not turn up, the license be given to him after blacklisting H2-Suirendra Singh, who has showed his inability to take license of Location-I (Tara Nagar), despite being the highest bidder.
(2.9) By order dated 16.04.2021, respondent No. 3 revoked the sanction in favour of Nagendra Singh, being the highest bidder for contentious location - Location-II, as he had given letter dated 15.04.2021 showing his disinclination to take the license.
(2.10) Respondent No. 3 also issued a letter dated 15.04.2021 to the petitioner asking whether he was ready to offer bid of Rs. 67,33,600/- (equal to H-2), in case first two bidders (H-1 and H-2) for Location-II, backed out from their offer.
(2.11) The petitioner, in turn, sent a communication dated 17.04.2021 to the respondent No. 3 and stated that both H1-Nagendra Singh and H2-Surendra Singh (respondent No. 4) are not interested in taking the license for Location-II, the license be awarded to him as he was the third highest bidder.
(2.12) On 17.04.2021, the respondent No. 3, however, proceeded to issue an offer letter to the respondent No. 4-H2 (the second highest bidder) for Location-II and asked him to deposit security amount of Rs. 67,336/- and 5% of the amount to the tune of Rs. 3,36,680/- by 16.04.2021 for grant of license to run composite shop at Location-II.
(2.13) On 18.04.2021 and 19.04.2021, the petitioner made representations to the respondent No. 3 requesting to grant him the license and also to black-list Surendra Singh, who having offered the highest bid, has backed out for Location-I.
(2.14) Feeling aggrieved with the above, order/communication dated 17.04.2021 offering license or
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
