V. D. CHATURVEDI,J.

1. Heard Shri Ram Raj learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri J. N. Mathur learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri H. P. Mathur learned Additional Chief Standing counsel.

2. Admit.

Let notice be issued to private opposite parties, who have been arrayed in connected petitions also returnable at an early date. Impleadment may be done during the course of day. Liberty is given to the petitioner to serve notice on private opposite parties outside the court also. Office shall provide notices.

3. While assailing the impugned Rule namely U. P. Demarcation & Regulation of Special Zones for Exclusive Privilege of Excise Shops Rules, 2009, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the rule in question followed by Circular dated 12. 2. 2009 deprived the petitioners right of renewal of licence which was available through the U. P. Excise (Settlement of Licences for Retail Sale of Country Liquor) Rules, 2002, in short hereinafter referred as 2002 Rules. In this context the petitioners counsel has relied upon the Supreme Court judgement reported in 2002 (7) SCC 104, Secretary to Government, T. N. and another Vs. K. Vinayagamurthy. It has been submitted

Click Here to Read the rest of this document