Rajes Kumar, J. - (1.) By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.07.2005 passed by Special Secretary, Government of U.P in revision, filed by Gyan Prakash, respondent No. 5
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a licensee of the I.M.F.L shop situated at Ward No. 12 in area of Sarai Meera Nagar palika district Kannauj for the period 2005-06. The petitioner has become the licensee of above shop on account of his; participation in the lottery held on 24.03.2005 for the first time. Respondent nos;5 and 6 were the licensee for the year 2004-05 in respect of the shop situated at ward No. 12 Sarai meera Bi-pass, In the year 2004-05 they opened the shop at Bajrang Hotel. In the year 2005-06, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 applied for the renewal of the licence. The last date for the renewal was 17.03.2005. On 16.03.2005, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 moved an application before the District Excise Officer for the shifting of their shop at the house of Shri Anil Kumar Vaishya in Sarai Meera, Ward No. 12. In the application chauhadi of the proposed shop was also given. Application is annexure-3 to the writ petition. On the aforesaid application, report was given by Sri D.K.Gupta, Excise Inspector, Circle No.-I,. Kannauj and on the basis of the said report on 17.03.2005 itself approval was granted by the District Excise Officer, which was also approved by the District Magistrate. In pursuance thereof the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 deposited the licence fee and opened the shop at the house of Shri Anil Kumar Viashya in Sarai Meera Nagar Ward No. 12. The licence fee for die shop of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 was Rs .2,64,500/-. Thereafter, petitioner moved an application before Excise Commissioner on 04.04.2005 objecting the shifting of the shop by the respondent Nos. 5 and 6. It has been stated that the present shop of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 was at about half kilometre from the petitioner's shop and is affecting the business of the petitioner while the petitioner licence feet was Rs. 6,61,300/- about three times of the licence fee of the shop, of respondent Nos. 5 and 6. It appears that on the said application, report; was sought from the Excise Inspector. Excise Inspectoron 12.04.2005 submitted his report, in which it was stated that in the year 2004-05 shop of the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 was situated at, Sarai Meera Bi-pass, in front of Bajrang Hotel and after the renewal of the licence for the year 2005-06 shop has been opened at Tirva crossing tiraha. It has been stated that the distance between Sarai Meera English Shop and Tirva crossing is only 500 mtr. which is a gross violation of circular No. 26487-557/10- LI-400/shops No.-02-03, dated 26.02.2002. In the circumstances, it is stated that in the interest of revenue the shop opened at Tirva crossing tiraha by the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 may be shifted at its original place. In pursuance thereof, District Excise Officer passed the order dated 14.04.2005 directing the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to shift the shop to its earlier place in Ward No. 12. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 filed appeal before the Excise Commissioner with the request that the appellant may be permitted to carry on the business at Sarai Meera Bi-pass, Ward No. 12. Meanwhile District Excise Officer vide order dated 16.04.2005 stayed the operation of the its order dated 14.04.2005. Against the order of District Excise Officer dated 16.04.2005 petitioner filed appeal under Section 11(1) of the Excise Act before Additional Commissioner Excise (Licensing Industrial Development), U.P., who, vide order dated 27.05.2005 remanded back the matter to the Collector with the observation that there was no justification on the part of the District Excise Officer to pass the order dated 16.04.2005. It has also been observed that there is no justification for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to shift his shop. Thereafter, District Magistrate passed an order dated 08.06.2005 and directed the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to settle their shop at the earlier place. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 filed revision against the order dated 27,05.2005 passed by Additional Commissioner Excise (Licensing Industrial Development), U.P. The said revision has been allowed by the impugned order and the order of Additional Commissioner Excise (Licensing Industrial Development), U.P. lias been set aside and direction was issued to the District Magistrate to allow both the shops to run at the present place. The result of the revisional Court order is that the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 have been permitted to run the shop at the Tirva crossing tiraha. Being aggrieved, petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the said order.
(3.) Heard Sri A.K.Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Neeraj Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 and learned Standing Counsel.;