SATISH CHANDRA, J. - (1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned order passed in Revision No. 45 of 2008 on 25th September, 2008 by the Special Secretary of the Excise Department and also the citation dated 28.4.2008.
(2.) SRI Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that for the Excise Year 2007-08 in village Urdauli, District Sitapur, an advertisement was published. The applications were invited for the license of country-made liquor shop. The petitioners after depositing the earnest money Rs. 15,650/- participated in the auction on 29.3.2007. As no other contestant participated in the said auction, so the shop was allotted to the petitioners as per telephonic information on 31.2.2007. By the said telephonic message, the petitioners were informed by the authorities that they were the successful allottee in the auction/lottery. As per the terms and conditions of the invitation to the offer, the petitioners were supposed to take delivery of 11,600 bulk litre of country-made liquor. As the quantity was too high, so the petitioners vide its letter dated 2.4.2007 (Annexure No.6) have refused to accept the invitation to the offer. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that as per Rule 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Excise (Settlement of Licences for Retail Sale of Country Liquor) Rules 2002 dated 14th March, 2002, the petitioners have neither submitted any basic licence fee within three days nor any security money within ten days. In the said Rule, it was mentioned that if the basic licence fee as well as the security money were not deposited within stipulated period, the offer will automatically be cancelled. Lastly, he submitted that by the impugned order, the demand of the licence fee for the full year under consideration is against the law, so the same may kindly be quashed. On the other hand, Sri Sanjay Sarin, learned counsel for the opposite-parties, submitted that once the petitioners have participated in the auction/lottery by depositing the earnest money, they have entered into the agreement with the Govt. and as per the rules, the petitioners are liable to pay the fee for full excise year.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and gone through the material available on record.;