MEHTA,J. - (1.) The instant special appeal (writ) has been preferred by the appellant (respondent No.4 in the writ petition) being aggrieved of the order dated 25.05.2021 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6896/2021 whereby, the writ petition preferred by the respondent No.4 Shri Devi Lal was accepted and the action of the District Excise Officer, Churu in granting licence of the composite liquor shop of Location-II (Kohina and Sayaran) to the appellant herein was struck down.
(2.) Facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant appeal are extensively narrated in the impugned order and the relevant extracts thereof are reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference: "(2.1) The State issued Excise and Liquor Policy 2021-22 dated 06.02.2021 in relation to terms and conditions of the license for sale and supply of Indian Made Foreign Liquor, Country Liquor, Beer and wine. (2.2) In furtherance of the policy aforesaid, an invitation dated 06.04.2021 to take part in e-auction came to be published giving out relevant terms and conditions of e-auction for grant of license. (2.3) The controversy at hand relates to two groups/locations - (i) Tara Nagar and; (ii) Kohina and Sayaran of District Churu (hereinafter referred to as Location-I and Location-II respectively). (2.4) For the purpose of clarity of facts, the relevant dates and amounts in relation to composite licence for both the locations are reproduced as under:- Location-II Tara Nagar Location-II Kohina and Sayaran Date of NIT 06.04.2021 06.04.2021 Date of auction 11.04.2021 11.04.2021 Successful Bidders H1-Surendra Singh (Rs.6,15,19,440/-) H2-Dinesh Kumar (Rs.4,16,14,440/-) H3-Vinit Kaswan (Rs.3,96,69,440/-) H1-Nagendra Singh (Rs.4,00,33,600/-) H2-Surendra Singh (Rs.67,33,600/-) H3-Devi Lal (Rs.67,28,600/-) Date by which H1 was required to make payment 16.04.2021 16.04.2021 (2.5) For the Location-I (Tara Nagar), respondent No.4, Surendra Singh offered the highest amount to the tune of Rs.6,15,19,440/-, whereas for Location-II (Kohina and Sayaran), he remained second highest bidder having offered a sum of Rs.67,33,600/-. (2.6) The petitioner herein was H-3 or third highest bidder for Location-II (Kohina and Sayaran) offering a bid of Rs.67,28,600/-. (2.7) The respondent No.3 issued a letter dated 11.04.2021 to respondent No.4, who was H-1 for Location-I asking him to deposit an amount of Rs.6,15,195/- by 16.04.2021 and 5% of the bid amount to the tune of Rs.30,75,972/- by 20.04.2021. (2.8) The petitioner addressed a letter dated 12.04.2021 to the respondent No.3 that in case H-1 for Location-II (Kohina and Sayaran) does not turn up, the license be given to him after blacklisting H2-Surendra Singh, who has showed his inability to take license of Location-I (Tara Nagar), despite being the highest bidder. (2.9) By order dated 16.04.2021, respondent No.3 revoked the sanction in favour of Nagendra Singh, being the highest bidder for contentious location - Location-II, as he had given letter dated 15.04.2021 showing his disinclination to take the license. (2.10)Respondent No.3 also issued a letter dated 15.04.2021 to the petitioner asking whether he was ready to offer bid of Rs.67,33,600/- (equal to H-2), in case first two bidders (H-1 and H-2) for Location-II, backed out from their offer. (2.11)The petitioner, in turn, sent a communication dated 17.04.2021 to the respondent No.3 and stated that both H1- Nagendra Singh and H2-Surendra Singh (respondent No.4) are not interested in taking the license for Location-II, the license be awarded to him as he was the third highest bidder. (2.12)On 17.04.2021, the respondent No.3, however, proceeded to issue an offer letter to the respondent No.4-H2 (the second highest bidder) for Location-II, and asked him to deposit security amount of Rs.67,336/- and 5% of the amount to the tune of Rs.3,36,680/- by 16.04.2021 for grant of license to run composite shop at Location-II. (2.13)On 18.04.2021 and 19.04.2021, the petitioner made representations to the respondent No.3 requesting to grant him the license and also to black-list Surendra Singh, who having offered the highest bid, has backed out for LocationI."
(3.) The matter firstly came up for consideration of the learned Single Bench on 10.05.2021. Shri Girish Sankhla, learned Standing Counsel for the Excise Department was directed to appear on behalf of respondent No.4-writ petitioner. Learned counsel Shri Sajjan Singh Rathore marked appearance on behalf of the respondent No.4- writ petitioner. Time was sought for by Shri Sankhla as well as Shri Sajjan Singh Rathore to file reply and both of them filed preliminary replies to the writ petition. The matter was finally heard and decided by the learned Single Bench on 25.05.2021 by the impugned order whereby, the writ petition was accepted. The offer letter dated 17.04.2021 so also the licence granted to the respondent No.4 were struck down. The Commissioner (Excise) was directed to take a conscious decision on or before 04.06.2021, either to award licence to the writ petitioner or to go for a fresh bid/auction for the Location-II (Kohina and Sayaran). The respondent No.4 (appellant herein) was permitted to operate the shop till 04.06.2021. Various other directions were given by the learned Single Bench to take appropriate steps in light of the statutory provision i.e. Clause (v) of Rule 74 of the Rajasthan Excise Rules, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1956'). Being aggrieved of the order dated 25.05.2021, the appellant Shri Surendra Singh (respondent No.4 in the writ petition) has approached this Court by way of this appeal. ;