RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Sandeep Mehta, Manoj Kumar Garg, JJ.
Surendra Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Spl. Appl. Writ No. 342/2021
Decided On : 03-06-2021
Excise - Licensing - Rajasthan Excise Rules, 1956 - Clause (v) of Rule 74 - The court interpreted Clause (v) of Rule 74, emphasizing that failure to deposit the required security amount disqualifies a bidder from obtaining a license for three years, influencing the decision to uphold the lower court's ruling.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the order of the Single Bench that quashed the license granted to him for a liquor shop after he failed to deposit the required security amount by the deadline, despite being the second highest bidder.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant's failure to deposit the security amount for Location-I automatically disqualified him from receiving the license for Location-II, as per the auction conditions and the relevant rules.
Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the license for Location-II after failing to meet the security deposit requirement for Location-I, and whether the Single Bench's order was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's failure to comply with the auction conditions led to automatic disqualification, and the subsequent license granted was void ab initio.
Result: The special appeal is dismissed as devoid of merit.
JUDGMENT
Mehta, J. - The instant special appeal (writ) has been preferred by the appellant (respondent No.4 in the writ petition) being aggrieved of the order dated 25.05.2021 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6896/2021 whereby, the writ petition preferred by the respondent No.4 Shri Devi Lal was accepted and the action of the District Excise Officer, Churu in granting licence of the composite liquor shop of Location-II (Kohina and Sayaran) to the appellant herein was struck down.
2. Facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant appeal are extensively narrated in the impugned order and the relevant extracts thereof are reproduced herein below for the sake of ready reference:
(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-II Tara Nagar | Location-II Kohina & Sayaran |
| Date of NIT | 06.04.2021 | 06.04.2021 |
| Date of auction | 11.04.2021 | 11.04.2021 |
| Successful Bidders | Hl-Surendra Singh -(Rs.6,15,19,440/-) H2-Dinesh Kumar -(Rs.4,16,14,440/-) H3-Vinit Kaswan -(Rs.3,96,69,440/-) | Hl-Nagendra Singh -(Rs.4,00,33,600/-) H2-Surendra Singh -(Rs.67,33,600/-) H3-Devi Lal -(Rs.67,28,600/-) |
| Date by which H-1 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-l 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-l for Location-II (Kohina & Sayaran) does not turn up, the license be given to him after blacklisting H2-Surendra 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-l 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 Hl-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 L
Failure to deposit the required security amount disqualifies a bidder from obtaining a license for three years, as per Clause (v) of Rule 74 of the Rajasthan Excise Rules, 1956.
order of blacklisting /debarment had been passed by the District Excise Officer regarding as many as 39 bidders and that this action indicated the dubious modus operandi resorted to by the bidders to....
Point of law: Granting license to such bidders, who have back-pedaled to serve their own vested interest and hidden agenda is against the public policy and contrary to statutory mandate
The State Government holds the authority to regulate excise shop locations and close them without notice if due procedure was followed.
Writ courts cannot grant interim relief beyond prayers by restraining un-challenged actions on third-party applications; incompetent subordinate notice quashed without affecting competent authority's....
The court upheld the validity of the Liquor Policy prohibiting public servants from holding liquor licences, affirming the State's authority to impose such conditions in public interest.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.