Back
An opportunity of hearing is a fundamental principle of natural justice and must be provided before issuing a demand notice.
Headnote:
LIQUOR LICENSE - OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING - DEMAND NOTICE - Petitioners aggrieved by demand notice dated 15.06.2022 issued without providing an opportunity of hearing. Petitioners claim to have already made the requisite payment and/or the demand raised is contrary to the Excise Policy. Petitioners filed their response/objections vide Annex.9, however, the same has not been dealt with.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners are aggrieved by the demand notice dated 15.06.2022 issued without providing an opportunity of hearing. Petitioners claim to have already made the requisite payment and/or the demand raised is contrary to the Excise Policy. Petitioners filed their response/objections vide Annex.9, however, the same has not been dealt with.
Finding of the Court:
The demand dated 15.06.2022 (Annex.8) has been issued based on audit objection and prior to the same, the petitioners were not afforded any opportunity of hearing, the demand raised cannot be sustained.
Issues: Whether the demand notice dated 15.06.2022 issued without providing an opportunity of hearing is valid?
Ratio Decidendi: The petitioners were not afforded any opportunity of hearing before issuing the demand notice dated 15.06.2022.
Final Decision: The demand raised by communication dated 15.06.2022 (Annex.8) shall not be enforced against the petitioners till the competent authority decides the response filed by the petitioners within a period of three weeks.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9145/2022
Lalita W/o Shri Kailash Narayan, Aged About 53 Years, By Caste
Mewara, Resident Of Cycle Market, Vijay Cold Drink, Jodhpur.
Licence Holder Of Country Made Liquor Composite Shop, Dabani-
2020--21, District - Sirohi, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Excise
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.
Excise Commissioner, Excise Department, Udaipur
(Rajasthan).
3.
District Excise Officer, Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9199/2022
Mada Ram S/o Shri Basti Ram Mewara, Aged About 48 Years, By
Caste Mewara, License Holder Of Country Made Liquor
Composite Shop, Anadara 2020-21, District Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Excise
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.
Excise Commissioner, Excise Department, Udaipur
(Rajasthan.).
3.
District Excise Officer, Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9211/2022
Nitesh Kumar Mewara S/o Madan Lal Mewara, Aged About 32
Years, Jainwas, Reodar, District Sirohi. License Holder Of Country
Made Liquor Composite Shop, Sirodi-2020-21, District Sirohi
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Excise
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.
Excise Commissioner, Excise Department, Udaipur
(Rajasthan).
3.
District Excise Officer, Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9257/2022
Dakhu Devi W/o Shri Basti Ram Mewara, Aged About 69 Years,
By Caste Mewara, Resident Of Village Guda Kallan, District Pali.
License Holder Of Country Made Composite Shop, Dolpura 2020-
21, District Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Excise
(2 of 3)
[CW-9145/2022]
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.
Excise Commissioner, Excise Department, Udaipur
(Rajasthan).
3.
District Excise Officer, Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10093/2022
Manohar Singh S/o Shri Bhawani Singh, Aged About 25 Years, By
Caste Mewara, R/o 41, Madhura Chetana Colony, Kusugal Road,
Hubali (Karanatakaka). License Holder Of Country Made Liquor
Composite Shop, Dantrai-2020-21, District Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Excise
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.
Excise Commissioner, Excise Department, Udaipur
(Rajasthan).
3.
District Excise Officer, Sirohi (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. S.S. Rathore.
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Girish Sankhla.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
09/01/2023
The petitioners are aggrieved of the demand dated
15.06.2022 (Annex.8). Submissions have been made that before
raising the said demand, the petitioners were not afforded any
opportunity of hearing.
Further submissions have been made that the raising of the
demand is ex-facie illegal, inasmuch as, the petitioners have
already made the requisite payment and/or the demand raised is
contrary to the Excise Policy.
Submissions have also been made that on issuance of the
said demand notice dated 15.06.2022, the petitioners have filed
their response/objections vide Annex.9, however, the same has
not been dealt with.
(3 of 3)
[CW-9145/2022]
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents made
submissions that the response (Annex.9) has not been filed by the
petitioners, however, it is not denied that before issuing the
demand dated 15.06.2022 (Annex.8), the petitioners were not
afforded any opportunity of hearing.
In the overall fact and circumstances, wherein, the demand
dated 15.06.2022 (Annex.8) has been issued based on audit
objection and prior to the same, the petitioners were not afforded
any opportunity of hearing, the
