ORDER

23.03.2023 Heard Shri B.D. Konwar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri S. Nandi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is presently running a business of an IMFL “OFF” Shop on the strength of a license issued to him in the year 2001. The shop is presently located at House No. 22, Banful Path, Hatigaon Road.

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 23.02.2023 directing him to relocate his shop.

Shri Konwar, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to an order dated 21.11.2022 passed by this Court in WP(C)/7434/2022 in which this Court had recorded its prima facie satisfaction on the running of the business in accordance with law.

Issue notice, returnable on 26.04.2023.

Shri P.N. Goswami, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam appearing for the Excise Department accepts notice on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 whereas Ms. D. Mahanta, learned counsel assisting Shri U.K. Nair, learned Senior Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent no. 6.

Heard the learned counsel on the interim prayer.

Shri Konwar, the learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the impugned order has been passed without any application of mind and by overlooking the relevant factors. On the other hand, Shri Goswami, the learned Addl. AG, Assam submits that the premises on which the business of the petitioner is presently running is not authorized for any commercial purpose and in this regard, he has produced before this Court the No Objection Certificate by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation granting building permission which is for residential and parking only. He had also raised the issue of the validity of the land agreement which the petitioner has annexed by submitting that the No Objection Certificate is in the name of Abhijit Roy whereas the agreement is with one Smt Amiya Gogoi.

The learned State Counsel submits that when the building in question is not for any commercial purpose, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned. He further submits that the action is a very reasonable one whereby the petitioner has been only directed to shift and there is no other coercive action for stoppage of his business.

Shri Nair, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondent no. 6 submits that the entire issue has arisen from a complaint made by his client and there is a legal infirmity apart from the other social causes in running the business from the present site.

Responding to the same, Shri Konwar, the learned Senior Counsel submits that the No Objection Certificate which is being mentioned by Shri Goswami, the learned Addl. AG pertains to another building and the premise from which he is running the business is actually for business purpose and the No Objection Certificate for the premises from which the business has been run is for commercial purpose.

Shri Konwar, the learned Senior Counsel is accordingly directed to produce the necessary documents in this regard.

After hearing the parties and on balancing the equities, it is submitted that till the returnable date, though no coercive action be taken against the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to produce the No Objection Certificate for the building from which he is running the business to substantiate his contention that the No Objection Certificate is for commercial purpose.

It is also made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to explore the option of shifting to any other location as permitted in accordance with law.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant Order downloaded on 27-07-2024 04:06:48 AM