Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of a bunch 101 petitions bearing CWP Nos. 5573, 5155, 5169, 5170, 5310, 5314, 5574, 5579, 5580, 5581, 5582, 5583, 5584, 5585, 5586, 5587, 5599, 5600, 5602, 5604 to 5510, 5635, 5703, 5706, 5708, 5723, 5725, 5728, 5729, 5734, 6045, 6052, 6053, 6057, 6062, 6133, 6140, 6141, 6145, 6166, 5840, 5850, 5856, 5860, 5929, 5930, 5931, 5933, 5935, 5937, 5949, 5968, 6248, 6261, 6361, 6370, 6846, 6921, 6941, 6942, 6943, 6945, 6946, 6948, 6980, 6981, 6982, 6983, 7006, 7082, 7183, 7190, 7193, 7196, 7214, 7278, 7292, 7294, 7295, 7297, 7304, 7305, 7558, 7569, 7574, 7722, 7795, 7831, 8255, 8438, 9131, 9312, 9366, 10417, 10424 and 10425 of 2014, as learned counsel for the parties are agreed that common question of law is involved therein. However, the facts are being extracted from CWP No. 5573 of 2014.
(2.) CWP No. 5573 of 2014 has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Clause 2B in the amended policy for the year 2014 -15, Annexure P. 6 to the extent whereby the licensee has been given an option to surrender only one vend/vends which fall on the highway out of complete group/licence compelling the licencee to continue with the vends. Further prayer has been made for quashing the public notice dated 21.3.2014, Annexure P. 8 whereby the individual vends falling on the highways have been put to auction by the respondents. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved, as narrated in CWP No. 5573 of 2014, may be noticed. The petitioners were allotted licences for retail outlet of country liquor (L -14A) and were allotted group Nos. 2, 3 and 11 in the District of Kaithal commencing from 1.4.2013 to 31.3.2015. The State of Haryana inspite of the directions of the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) dated 4.8.2012 and letter dated 1.12.2011 of the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport Highways, Road Safety Cell, auctioned the liquor vends on National Highways under the Excise policy of 2013 -14 which was made for two years. One society namely Arrive Safe filed a Public Interest Litigation in this Court challenging the policy of the State based on the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 prescribing 30 meters distance being contrary to the directions issued by NHAI and Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. Finally the State of Haryana instead of curtailing the policy for one year issued amended policy for the remaining year of 2014 -15. The two clauses which were amended -one was relating to the distance from the National Highway and State Highway which was subject matter of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and the other -Clause 2B which related to the shifting of the vends and the surrender etc. By incorporating Clause 2B in the amended policy for the year 2014 -15, the respondents tried to bifurcate the group as well as the licence unilaterally without seeking consent of the petitioners or any other shareholder in the said policy. Pursuant to the amended policy Annexure P. 5, the respondents have issued a public notice in the newspaper on 21.3.2014, Annexure P. 8 inviting bids for auction of the vends which are going to be surrendered. Hence the present writ petitions by the petitioners.
(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.;