M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 4.3.2006 passed by the Excise Commissioner. Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby he has put a condition for renewal of retail licence of Group I and Group II shops for the year 2006 -07 and directed that in cases where Group I and Group II excise shops of a district has been settled with one person/firm, the licence for both the groups shall be renewed together and, in no circumstances, the renewal of one group shall be made after leaving another group.
(2.) , The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: In 2004, Government of Jharkhand came with a new excise policy on 21.2.2004 according to which all retail country liquor and spiced country liquor shops falling within the district would be constituted and settled in one group and all retail foreign liquor, wine and beer shops in a district would be constituted and settled in another group. Pursuant to the aforesaid policy decision, a sale notification in Form 127 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad inviting application for settlement of retail country and spiced country liquor shops in one group (Group I) and foreign liquor and beer shops in another group (Group II) for the period 2004 -2007 through auction -cum -tender. Petitioner applied for settlement of both the groups of shop in the district of Dhanbad and deposited security money separately for each group of shops. The petitioner was declared the highest bidder in respect of both the groups of shop and the same was settled with it. Accordingly, licence for the year 2004 -05 was issued in favour of the petitioner for both the groups of shop separately on payment of licence fee. In 2006 the Excise Commissioner issued impugned order dated 4.3.2006 incorporating a new condition for renewal of Groups I and II retail licences for the year 2006 -07. According to this condition, in cases where Group I and Group II excise shops of a district has been settled with one person/firm, the licence for both the groups shall be renewed together and in no circumstances, the renewal of one group shall be made after leaving another group. A counter -affidavit has been filed by the department of Excise and Prohibition, Govt. of Jharkhand , Ranchi, Wherein the respondents, inter alia, stated that petitioner has taken settlement of Group I and Group II shops on the condition that it would pay Rs. 2,52,00,000.00 per month as licence fee. But the petitioner had not deposited the licence fee for four months i.e. December 2005, January 2006, February 2006 and March 2006 which comes to nearly rupees ten crores. It is further stated that the petitioner never lifted the Minimum Guarantee Quota and thereby violated the terms and conditions of the licence. It is also stated that petitioner and many other licencees who are having licences for both the groups have surrendered Group I in the midst of block period of three years by taking the advantage of interim order passed in W.P. (C) No. 1493 of 2005 and other analogues cases disposed of on 24.3.2006.
(3.) IN a separate counter -affidavit filed by Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad and Assistant Commissioner, Excise, Dhanbad, it is stated that petitioner is a defaulter, inasmuch as heavy admitted dues more than ten crores has not been deposited till the financial year 2005 -06. It is further stated that at the midst of licence period petitioner cannot surrender licence of any Group. It is also stated that Government can at any time change the policy decision and the licencees are bound to abide by those conditions.;