Hari Prasad vs Collector Ballia and Others

D.S. Sinha, J.—Heard Sri S.N. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri A.C. Tripathi, learned Special Counsel representing the Respondents.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by calling for a return from the Respondents in view of the order which we ate passing upon the joint request and agreement of the learned Counsel for the parties.

For the excise year 1991-92 the Petitioner held a licence to vend Tari at Maicagori, Rasra in the district of Ballia. The licence was valid till 30th September, 1995 en which date the Petitioner moved an application for renewal of the licence. A copy of the renewal application moved by the Petitioner is Annexure-2 to the petition. This application is still pending before the Collector, Ballia. In the meantime a public notice dated 9th December, 1992 has been issued inviting applications for grant of licence to vend Tari at Mainagori. The grievance of the Petitioner is that his application far renewal is sot being disposed of by the Collector inspite of lapse of a period of more than three months and without disposing of his application either way invitation of fresh applications for grant of the licence to vend Tari in the shop at Mainagori is illegal.

Rule 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Excise (Licensing under the Surcharge Fee System) First Amendment Rules, 1974, as contained in paragreph 381 of the U.P. Excise Manual, obliges the Collector to decide as to whether the existing licence for sale of excisable article should be renewed or not. It authorises the Collector to decline to renew the licence if the licensee is found to be unsuitable; but before doing so he has to issue a show cause notice and, after considering such explanation as may be offered by the licensee, if he finds the licensec to be unsuitable person he may refuse renewal and invite applications and select a new licensee is accordance with rules. The provisions indicate that invitation and selection of new licensee in place of the existing one can take place only if the existing licensee has been found to be unsuitable and before deciding the question of suitability of the existing licensee for renewal invitation and selection of a new licensce would be illegal.

For the fore going reasons, we direct the Collector. Ballia to decide and dispose of the application of the Petitioner dated 30th September, 1992. a copy whereof is Annexure-2 to the writ petition, within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, on merits and in accordance with law, and till then keep further proceedings in respect of grant of new licence to vend Tari at the shop located at Mainagori, Rasra in the district of Ballia, in pursuance of the public notice dated 9th December, 1992, a copy whereof is Annexure-I to the supplementary-affidavit filed in this Court, suspended.

Subject to the observations and directions made above, the petition is disposed of finally.