Rajesh Bindal, J. - (1.) The petitioner approached this court with a grievance that his liquor vends have been sealed by the respondents without any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing.
(2.) At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 27.7.2016, the following contentions made by learned counsel for the petitioner were noticed: "Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was a successful bidder for Group No. 3 for L-14-A licence for country liquor for which auction was held on 16.5.2016. As per clause 3.3.3 of the Excise Policy applicable for the year 2016-17, licensee was required to deposit 10% of the bid amount, thereafter, he was entitled to lift upto 5% of annual quota. Though the petitioner deposited a sum of 19.66 lacs by 25.5.2016 but till date no quota has been released to the petitioner. Without even issuing any notice, liquor vend was sealed on 5.7.2016."
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was successful bidder for liquor vends in Group No. 3 for L-14A licence, the auction for which was held on 16.5.2016. After depositing 10% of the licence fee upto 25.5.2016, the petitioner was entitled for issuance of permit for lifting 5% of the quota. The permit was applied on 13.6.2016. When it was not issued till 25.6.2016, request was made for cancellation of request. As the department had failed to issue permit to the petitioner for 5% of the annual quota, demand for balance 11% of the licence fee was not justified. As a result of the action of the respondents, the petitioner had not been able to operate the vends.;