There is no fundamental right to trade in liquor; state policies can modify licensing rights as long as they comply with statutory provisions.

JUDGMENT :

Pankaj Bhatia, J.

1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, Shri Shobhit Mohan Shukla, Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, Shri Rohit Jaiswal, Shri Abhishek Singh and Shri Avinash Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Dr. L.P. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the State assisted by Shri Anil Pratap singh, learned Addl. Advocate General, Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned CSC, Shri Pankaj Khare, learned A.C.S.C., Shri Tushar Verma, learned A.C.S.C., Shri Badrish Tripathi, learned A.C.S.C., Shri Abhishek Kumar Pandey, A.C.S.C. and Shri Dheerendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.

2. Present writ petitions have been filed challenging the Government Order dated 06.02.2025 specifically 5.11 issued by respondent no.1. There is also a challenge to the consequential order dated 06.02.2025 issued by respondent no.2 and the notices dated 13.02.2025 issued by respondent no.3 which provides for settlement of all country liquor shops through e-lottery process including the shop of the petitioners as contained in Annexures – 1 to 3. A further mandamus has been sought commanding respondent no.3 to exclude the shop of the petitioners for the settlement through e-lottery for the Excise Year 2025 – 26. It is further prayed that any other writ which this Court may deem appropriate may be issued.

3. The facts that arise from all the petitions are that the petitioners were running liquor shops by virtue of the licenses granted in their favour in terms of the policy which subsisted prior to passing of the policy dated 06.02.2025. It is claimed that most of the petitioners were running the shops since the year 2018 which were granted to them through e-lottery process and were renewed on a yearly basis on the basis of the demands and fees as demanded which were enhanced from time to time. It is further stated that in terms of the license granted in the year 2018 and renewed subsequently from year to year, the last such license in favour of the petitioners was to subsist till 31.03.2025 and there was a legitimate expectation that in terms of the prescriptions contained in the rules, an option of renewal shall be conferred and shall be given to the petitioners, however, the State Government through Government Order dated 06.02.2025 framed the excise policy. In terms of the said excise policy, the manner of allocation and grant of shops was radically modified and it was provided that all the liquor shops which were under the control of the State Government and are regulated by virtue of the U.P. Excise Act and the Rules framed thereunder shall be amended and shall be given through a fresh e-lottery to be drawn as prescribed in the government policy. Certain other prescriptions were also noticed in the said government policy. The said policy for the sake of brevity is being referred to ‘New Excise Policy, 2025’.

4. In sum and substance of the arguments is that Condition No.5.11 of the said policy takes away the rights of consideration for renewal which were vested in favour of the petitioners in terms of various rules and to that extent it is proposed to be argued that the policy is bad in law. The other contentious issue as raised is with regard to Clause 5.15.2.2(1)(ga) wherein it has been prescribed that all the stocks which are lying with the licensee shall be taken on 01.04.2025 and shall be kept in the custody of the Excise Commissioner which shall be destroyed by them under their guidance and videography, and no amount of compensation shall be payable to the licensee.

5. In nutshell argument raised by the petitioners are in respect of these two clauses which are said to be offending.

6. The first argument raised is that the policy decision is contrary to Rule 5 of the Rules which have been framed for regulating the sale of various liquor shops. The second argument raises is that the circular which is in the form of a Government Order cannot override the rules which specifically provide for consideration and right