K.C. Agarwal, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed challenging the recovery of interest of two years i.e. 1982 -83 and 83 -84. The amount of the previous year was Rs. 17,567.70p. whereas that of the subsequent year was Rs. 7436.15p. Having offered highest bid, the petitioner was given a licence of vending country liquor for Jodhpur City -Group, Jodhpur, for the years 1982 -83 and 83 -84. A photostat copy of the licence given to the petitioner has been filed as Annex. 1A. This describes the various amounts which has to be deposited by the petitioner in those years. A copy of the licence of the petitioner is annexed as Annex. IB. The relevant clauses of this Licence are being reproduced below: Varnacular Text Varnacular Text
(2.) THE petitioner under the licence was required to make monthly deposits in the manner laid down in the contract. It, however, defaulted in making payment for the year 1982 -83. Hence recovery was started against it for the interest through the notice dated 24.10.83 Annex.2 for the amount of Rs. 17,567.70p. The petitioner committed default in making the payment of amount due with respect to the year 1983 -84 also. The Department issued the notice dt. 4.1.84 for recovering Rs. 7436.15 as interest. The petitioner has challenged the recovery on the grounds that as no determination of the amount actually due from the petitioner had taken place and no opportunity of hearing had been given to him before either determing the amount or issuing a notice for recovering the interest, hence the recovery was illegal and bad in law.
(3.) IT is settled that the principles of natural justice do not apply to a matter of contract. In the instant case, a contract In the shape of licence had been entered into which does not provide for any opportunity being given to a defaulter. The petitioner was in the capacity of a defaulter and in that capacity, the proceedings for recovery of the amount mentioned above for the two years 1982 -83 and 1983 -84 were started. It is also undisputable that the principles of natural justice can expressly or impliedly be excluded by a Statute. In the instant case, the Clause '2 kha' quoted above makes it abundantly clear that the money, not paid in accordance with agreement, could be recovered by the Excise Department. It does not lay down any requirement of any opportunity being given to the petitioner. Similarly, since the amount as and when fell due, was known to the petitioner, there was no question of its determination as well as the recovery, therefore, it is not illegal on the two grounds mentioned.;