SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 11067

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
SRI SANKAR KALITA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS – Respondent
I.A.(Civil) / 3673 / 2025



GAHC010249192025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WA/368/2025 SRI SANKAR KALITA

S/O LATE BIPIN CHANDRA KALITA, R/O PUB SARANIA, P.O. P.S.-

CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI,DISTRICT-KAMRUP, ASSAM-781003.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF

ASSAM, EXCISE DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006

2:THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX

DISPUR

GUWAHATI 781006

3:THE DIST. COMMISSIONER

KAMRUP (M)

GUWAHATI.

4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

HENGRABARI

KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM 781036

5:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE (WEST)

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

HENGRABARI

KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM 781036

6:HATIGAON SANMILITA MAHILA PARISHAD KAMRUP GUWAHATI ASSAM 781038 EPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. NISHA BORDOLOI AND ITS SECY. SMT. BANDANA HAZARIKA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV., MS S JAIN,MS M ZOMUANPUII,MR J SINGH,MR H AGARWAL,MRS J M KONWAR Advocate for the Respondent : SC, EXCISE DEPTT., GA, ASSAM Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/3673/2025 SRI SANKAR KALITA S/O LT. BIPIN CHANDRA KALITAR/O- PUB SARANIA P.O P.S.- CHANDMARI GUWAHATIDISTRICT-KAMRUP ASSAM-781003.

VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EXCISE DEPTT.

DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006

2:THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006

3:THE DIST. COMMISSIONER KAMRUP (M)

GUWAHATI.

4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HENGRABARI KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM 781036

5:THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE (WEST)

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HENGRABARI KAMRUP (M)

ASSAM 781036

6:HATIGAON SANMILITA MAHILA PARISHAD KAMRUP GUWAHATI ASSAM 781038 EPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. NISHA BORDOLOI AND ITS SECY. SMT. BANDANA HAZARIKA.

------------

For the Petitioner/appellant(s) : Mr. B. D. Konwar, Sr. Advocate Ms. S. Jain, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Gogoi, SC, Excise Deptt.

Ms. R.B. Bora, Jr. GA, Assam – BEFORE –

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

19.11.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ)

We have heard Mr. B. D. Konwar, learned senior Advocate for the appellant and Mr. D. Gogoi, learned Advocate representing the Excise Department/ respondents.

The appellant has questioned the judgment dated 01.11.2025, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No. 1653/2023, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed and the decision of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M), directing the appellant to shift his liquor shop to another location which conforms to all the norms regarding location of a liquor shop and also cautioning the appellant that if the shop is not relocated, appropriate steps would be taken for closure of the liquor shop of the appellant in terms with the Assam Excise Act, 2000, read with Assam Excise Rules, 2016, has been sustained.

The case of the appellant is that he had been running a licensed IMFL “OFF’ retail shop under Licence No.52/2000-2001, since the year 2001. The licence has been regularly renewed every year, including for the year 2025-2026. In the year 2022, he had shifted his shop to a new premises at House No. 22, Banful Path, Hatigaon, after obtaining all required statutory approvals, namely, NOC from Guwahati Municipal Corporation and also from the neighbouring residents (majority of the residents had no objection) and the final sanction from the Commissioner of Excise.

The appellant had been running his shop peacefully. However, sometimes in February, 2023, 6 local residents, out of 24 residing within 75 meters of the IMFL shop of the appellant, filed objections. The objections were in the nature of expected disorderly behavior of the society in the wake of the existence of two liquor shops in the same area. There was no complaint of any nuisance or law and order problem arising out of the liquor shop of the appellant, or of any violation of excise norms by the appellant. Nonetheles

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top