- (1.) THE common controversy, in this batch of the writ petitions, lies in different perception and interpretation of Clause 5 of the New Excise Policy issued by Excise Department, Government of Jharkhand, published in the official gazette dated 24th February, 2004 (Annexure -1): All the writ petitions were tagged and heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.
(2.) THE brief fact giving rise to the batch of the cases is that the State of Jharkhand issued an amended excise policy by gazette notification dated 24th February, 2004 whereby a new excise policy for settlement of retail liquor shops was brought into effect from the financial year 2004 -05. Prior to the said notification, excise "retail shops were used to be settled individually for one year. But in the amended policy, excise retail shops of country spirit and country spiced spirit are to be settled in Group -I, whereas retail Indian Foreign Made Liquor Shops are to be settled in Group -ll for a block period of three years. Clause 5 of the said notification provides 10% increase in the licence fee in second and third year of the settlement. In accordance with the said policy, sale notification was published inviting applications for settlement of retail liquor shops. The shops were settled in the names of firms/persons, who are the private respondents in these writ petitions, on various dates. They deposited licence fees.
(3.) THE controversy between the parties is regarding date of implementation of Clause 5 i.e. the date of 10% increase in the licence fee in second and third year of settlement, as provided in Clause 5 of the said notification, which reads as follows: "5. BANDOVASTI TIN VARSH Kl BLOK AWADHI KE LIYE Kl JAYEGI. BANDOVASTI KE DUSRE EVAM TISRE VARSH ME PRATYEK BAR DAS PRATISHAT Kl VRIDHi PRATIVARSH NILAMI RASHI ME Kl JAYEGI." ;