ORDER :

1. This Civil Writ Petition has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:-

“i. the respondents may kindly be directed to renew the license of the Petitioner for composite liquor Shop Code3502010 located at Village Chakoonda, Tehsil Arnod, District Pratapgarh (Raj.) for further financial year 2022-2023 and 2023-24 after taking the increased amount as fixed under the point No. 2.5.3 of Excise and Temperance Policy for year 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 on the annual guarantee amount of Rs.68,75,680/-of year 2021-2022 and

ii. hold the Respondents are bound by principle of promissory estoppel and cannot change or turnaround from the assurance made by them in the Excise Policy of the year 2021-22.

iii. the additional Composite fee taken by the Respondent from the Petitioner for year 2021-22 be adjusted in the renewed license of 2022-23 or in alternate refunded back to the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the issue of composite fee having been charged for the purpose of license for allotment of particular shop, in accordance with the Rajasthan Excise Policy for the year 2021-22.

2.1 Learned counsel submits that the Rajasthan Excise Department conducted e-auction in which, the license was granted for a particular shop. The highest bidder failed to deposit money in time due to which, his license was cancelled and subsequently, the present petitioner being the next highest bidder, had furnished e-bid of Rs.68,75,680/- as an Annual Guarantee.

2.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the e-auction for issuing license for the shop was conducted but the auction could not succeed, therefore, it was re-auctioned in which, H1 did not appear and H2, who is the present petitioner was given the shop.

2.3 Learned counsel also submits that vide letter dated 27.09.2021 (Annex.2) issued by Office of District Excise Officer, Pratapgarh, it was informed that since the petitioner did not accept the condition to deposit the H1 bid amount of Rs.2,35,75,680/-, therefore, he was issued temporary approval to run the liquor shop by depositing the H2 bid amount to the tune of Rs.68,75,680/-; the composite fee, therefore, was decided as Rs.3,97,863/-which was to be deposited in two equal installments; the first installment was to be paid on 02.10.2020 and the remaining 50% of the installment was to be paid on 15.10.2021.

2.4 Learned counsel further submits that, however, under protest, the petitioner had deposited composite fee, but it is in contravention to the condition No.4.4 of the Rajasthan Excise Policy. He thus, submits that the respondent-State was under an obligation to revisit the issue regarding composite fee.

3. Mr. M.S. Singhvi, learned Senior Advocate & Advocate General, assisted by Mr. K.S. Lodha, appearing on behalf of the respondents, however, accepts the factual matrix of the case and submits that in re-auction, H2, who is the present petitioner, was offered the shop vide Annex.2 dated 27.09.2021, after a situation arose in which, the petitioner accepted to deposit the composite fee of Rs.3,97,863/-, to be deposited in two equal installments; the notice is for the second installment, as the first installment has already been paid and that the second installment has also been paid.

3.1. He has further drawn the attention of this Court to the Rajasthan Excise Policy, particularly, condition No.4.4 and submits that in accordance with the same, re-visitation of the composite fee was made in accordance with law and that is why, a specific composite fee was imposed upon the present petitioner in the given circumstances, and thus, the petitioner now cannot claim to have been prejudiced by the composite fee. He refers to the conditions Nos.4.4 and 4.5 of the policy, which read as follows:-

^^4-4 foRrh; o"kZ ds nkSjku fdlh nqdku dk iqu% cUnkscLr fd;s tkus dh fLFkfr esa lEcfU/kr nqdku dh dEiksftV Qhl dk iqu%fu/kkZj.k fd;k tk;sxkA

4-5 dEiksftV Qhl dk vuqikfrd vk/kkj ij cUnkscLr djus rFkk mldh Lohd`fr jkT; ljdk