Nand Kishore Prasad Singh vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners have approached this Court for the following relief:--

(i) An appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the condition imposed while renewing the licence for Bar & Restaurant of the petitioner for the year 2013-14, whereby the petitioner has been required to submit an approval for commercial use of the place of business of the petitioner within one month failing which it has been stated that the renewal of the licence of the petitioner shall itself be deemed to have been cancelled.

Petitioners have been allowed to run Bar and Restaurant on the basis of excise licenses for the last several years in the same premises which are said to be residential in nature. However, on this occasion, while renewing the license for the year 2013-14, respondents have imposed condition upon the petitioners to get permission of commercial use of premises in question, failing which, petitioners'' excise licenses should be treated as revoked w.e.f. 30.4.2013.

On the last date, after hearing the parties the matter was adjourned in order to enable the learned counsel for the Respondents-State to justify the source of power to impose a condition while renewing the license for the year 2013-14 that the petitioners were required to get permission of commercial use of the premises, in question, failing which the petitioners'' license should be treated as revoked w.e.f. 30th April, 2013.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners during the course of the argument has relied upon the relevant provisions of the Excise Act and Rules framed thereunder that there are no conditions prescribed thereunder nor in the Form under which licenses for Bar and Restaurant is issued under statutory Form-X which is annexed to the appendix.

Learned senior counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Kerala Samsthana Chethu Thozhilali Union Vs. State of Kerala and Others, , in order to advance his submission that if no such power has been conferred upon the delegatee by the Parent Excise Act or Rules to encroach upon the domain or jurisdiction of any other department, while exercising its powers for control and regulation of trade in liquor any such condition as in the present case imposed by the respondents is not backed by the authority of law and therefore cannot be made a condition for renewal of license or its revocation.

Learned counsel for the Respondents-State today once again harps on the same submission that the petitioners have been operating the Bar and Restaurant in the premises which are residential in nature, though the activities is commercial. However, learned counsel has not been able to show any provision under the Excise Act and the Rules framed thereunder or the conditions as. specified in the Form, under which Bar and Restaurant''s license is issued to justify the imposition of such a condition on renewal of Bar and Restaurant licenses of the petitioners, which admittedly have been granted for more than 10 years in respect of the same premises of the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the Respondents-State has also made a submission that the petitioners had given an undertaking to get the nature of the premises converted for commercial use at the time of renewal of their present licenses. However, learned counsel for the Respondents-State has not been able to show as to under what source of power under the Parent Excise Act and the Rules such a condition can be imposed.

In that view of the matter, therefore, the condition imposed while renewing the license for the year 2013-14 in respect of the petitioners, does not appear to have been supported by any valid source of power under the Parent Excise Act and Rules framed thereunder or the forms prescribed, therefore, they cannot be sustained in law and the condition so imposed with which the petitioners are aggrieved, is accordingly quashed. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand allowed.