- (1.) THE Commissioner Excise, Government of Rajasthan, by a notice dated 31.1.2014, invited tenders for grant of licence for wholesale and retail sale of lanced poppy heads. The petitioner as well as the respondent No.4 Shri Mahendra Singh submitted applications for grant of licence relating to Barmer -I and Nimbahera -I joint group. After adhering the process for grant of licence, the sanction was granted in favour of the respondent No.4 under a letter dated 18.2.2014. On receiving a complaint about eligibility of the respondent No.4 to have the licence for the sale of lance poppy heads, the Commissioner Excise called upon him vide letter dated 22.2.2014 to explain as to why the sanction issued be not withdrawn. The District Excise Officer, Barmer scrutinised the allegations made in the complaint and arrived at the conclusion that the respondent No.4 was convicted for an offence punishable under the Excise Act and he also concealed necessary information about his conviction. On basis of the findings arrived the sanction granted to the respondent No.4 was cancelled and the same was tendered in favour of the petitioner under a letter dated 28.2.2014.
(2.) THE respondent No.4 by way of filing an appeal before the Excise Commissioner assailed the cancellation of the sanction granted to him and also the grant of the same to the petitioner. The appeal came to be accepted by order dated 25.3.2014 passed by the Commissioner Excise. To challenge the order dated 25.3.2014 passed by the Commissioner Excise the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Rajasthan Tax Board as per provisions of Section 9 -A(3) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1950'). The registry of the Tax Board fixed the revision petition and stay petition annexed thereto for consideration on 19.5.2014. Looking to the delay in posting the revision petition as well as the stay application for consideration, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this petition for writ.
(3.) THE petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Commissioner Excise dated 25.3.2014 on several counts. A caveat has been lodged on behalf of the respondent NO.4 to oppose admission of the writ petition and any order on the stay petition.;