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

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 581043

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
MANOJ SINGH BISHT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Office Notes,

reports, orders or proceedings

SL.

Date or directions COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

No.

and Registrar’s

order with Signatures

WPMS No. 2539 of 2025

With

WPMS No. 2540 of 2025

Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1. Mr. Rahul Adhikari, learned counsel

for the petitioners.

2. Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of

Uttarakhand.

3. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions, therefore, both these petitions are clubbed together and decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity and convenience, facts of WPMS No. 2539 of 2025 alone are being

considered.

4. Petitioner is a licencee for retail sale of Country Made Liquor. His licence to sell Country Made Liquor was suspended vide order dated 19.08.2025 passed by District Excise Officer. Challenging the suspension order, petitioner has filed this

writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that District Excise Officer is not competent to pass the order of suspension, as District Magistrate alone is competent for the purpose. He further submitted that a licence can be suspended only on the ground indicated in Section 34 of the Uttarakhand Excise Act, 1910 and none o

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top