AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Katju and R.S. Tripathi, JJ.—Heard Pramod Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent not to issue any fresh wine shop licence in pursuance of the notification dated 2.4.2004.
Admittedly the petitioner has a country liquor shop and it appear that he does not want another country liquor shop to be opened in the locality.
In our opinion, the petitioner has no locus standi in the matter. In Mithilesh Garg v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 1993 SC 443, the Supreme Court observed following its own decision in M/s. Rice and Flour Mills v. State of U. P. and Ors. AIR 1971 SC 46 and Jasbhai Motibhai Desai Vs. Roshan Kumar, Haji Bashir Ahmed and Others, , that a rival businessman has no locus standi to file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution even if grant of licence to his rival is illegal. This view has been followed by this Court in Hari Prasad Gupta v. Zila Panchayat. 1995 (2) UPLBEC 117I and Supreme Court in Northern Plastics Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Photo Films Mfg. Co. Ltd. and Others, .
The aforesaid judgment has been followed by a Division Bench of this Court in Rajoo v. State of U. P., C.M.W.P. No. 491 of 2003, decided on April 1, 2003. Following the above decisions, this petition is dismissed.