In Re: F.M.A. 773 of 2014

The appellant has questioned the judgment and order dated 14th December, 2011 passed in W.P. 20269(W) of 2011, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition.

In the said writ petition a prayer has been made to fill up the vacancy left by one Shri Goutam Pramanick offering licence of Foreign Liquor Off Shop to the petitioner situated at Debipur Gram Panchayat within Police Station-Falta, District-South 24-Parganas.

As a matter of fact, the selection of licence of Foreign Liquor Off Shop had been undertaken in which petitioner could not succeed. One Shri Goutam Pramanick had been selected, who could not start the shop due to public disturbance and subsequently his licence had been cancelled, vacancy had been declared and fresh process had been initiated for grant of licence. The petitioner submitted that he had deposited a sum of Rs. 8,000/- while making the application in the process in which one Shri Goutam Pramanick had been selected. Thus, he had acquired the right of consideration of his application. The said selection process ended in the year 2005 in which the petitioner had not been selected.

The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the filing of the application along with sum of Rs. 8,000/- did not create any right in his favour. His application was considered and he was not selected. Therefore, he did not acquire any right to be appointed in case of vacancy, which may fall in future due to one reason or other. Licence of one Shri Goutam Pramanick had been cancelled and the petitioner was unsuccessful participant in the said process. As such, he could not claim right to be appointed in place of Shri Goutam Pramanick.

Learned advocate for the appellant has strenuously submitted that as vacancy had arisen and the appellant had already filed an application, he ought to have been offered the Foreign Liquor Off Shop licence. By not doing so, illegality has been committed. Thus, the impugned decision is liable to be set aside.

After hearing the learned advocate for the appellant, we are of the opinion that no case for interference is made out. Once the appellant/writ petitioner was an unsuccessful participant in the process of selection of Foreign Liquor Off Shop in question, merely by cancellation of licence of Shri Goutam Pramanick, no right has been accrued in favour of the appellant/writ petitioner so as to be appointed a licensee in place of Shri Goutam Pramanick for the Foreign Liquor Off Shop in question.

Thus, it was open to the respondents to declare a vacancy of licence of Foreign Liquor Off Shop, and to auction it as per provision in which the petitioner could have been a participant.

Thus, we find no case for interference is made out in the intra court appeal. The intra court appeal being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed.

In view of the dismissal of the intra court appeal, nothing remains in the application for stay filed under C.A.N. 8860 of 2012 and the same is also dismissed.

We, however, make no order as to costs.