PRAWIN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, alleging non -renewal of existing licences for manufacture and sale of country spirit in respect of ten Out Still shops (for short, 'O.S. shops') in the district of Keonjhar praying for a direction to Opp. Party No. 3 Collector, Keonjhar to renew the existing licenses of the Petitioner under Annexure -1 series for the year 2008 -2009 in his favour and for a declaration that the action of the Opp. Party No. 3 in issuing show cause notice under Annexure -4 for inclusion of name of Opp. Party No. 7 in the existing licences of the Petitioner and subsequently inclusion of name of Opp. Party No. 7 in the renewal licences of the Petitioner are illegal, without jurisdiction and bad in law.

(2.) THE Petitioner was granted exclusive privilege for carrying on business in manufacturing and selling of country spirit in the district of Keonjhar on the strength of licences issued by the Collector, Keonjhar in ten O.S. shops for the year 2004 -05 vide licence Nos. 18/04/05 to 27/04 -05 which had been renewed from 1st April, 2005 to 31st March, 2006 on deposit of consideration amount fixed by the State Government. The further case of the Petitioner is that he successfully carried out the manufacturing and selling of country spirit by managing the out still shops to his utmost devotion and has never defaulted in paying the dues of the Government. He further states that on 1.4.2006 he had entered into a partnership agreement with O.P. No. 7 who was the exclusive privilege holder in respect of eight aut Still shops in the district of Keonjhar. The partnership agreement to constitute a partnership firm is stated have been entered for smooth operation of the eighteen O.S. shops in respect of which Petitioner and O.P. No. 7 had been granted licences.

(3.) AFTER receipt of the notices, O.P. Nos. 5, 7 and 8 have filed their returns separately. It may be relevant to mention here that even though the Petitioner has impleaded O.P. No. 8, as his name also had been recommended by the Collector to be included as a co -licensee along with Petitioner and O.P.No.7, the Petitioner has not claimed any relief against O.P. No. 8. From the returns submitted by O.P. No. 5 and O.P. No. 7, it appears that O.P. No. 3 - Collector has passed a detailed office order assigning reasons while recommending the Government to renew the licenses of the Petitioner along with O.P. Nos. 7 and 8. The said order of the Collector, which is Annexure -1/7 to the counter affidavit filed by O.P. No. 7, is quoted here -in -below for ready reference: District Excise Office: Keonjhar No. 719/Ex.Dtd. 31.03.2008 Office Order Whereas one Sri Prawin Kumar Immamganj, Dist: Gaya, Bihar had been granted exclusive privilege in respect of 10 out still shops in the district of Keonjhar with the condition to submit local surety and adequate local solvency, apart from irrevocable Bankguarantee equivalent to two months consideration money; And whereas in spite of several notices sent to him, Sri Prawin Kumar failed to submit adequate local solvency in the District Excise Office, Keonjhar till 31.3.2008. And whereas to save himself from such a situation, Sri Prawin Kumar entered into a partnership deed with one Sri Rajesh Kumar Sahu of Titilagarh, Dist: Bolangir, Orissa on 1.5.05 declaring therein that he has already applied for addition of the name of Sri Rajesh Kumar Sahu as a co -licence holder or a joint licensee with the mutual consent of party of both part with same terms and conditions of licence and thereafter tagged the solvency certificate of Rs. 99,000 originally submitted by him, as an immediate measure to comply with the instruction for submission of local surety and local solvency at the earliest. And whereas one Satyajit Singh of Poiwan, Dist: Aurangabad, Bihar filed a representation before the Collector, Keonjhar disclosing therein that a partnership deed was executed on 1.4.03 between seven partners including Sri Prawin Kumar to carry on business in liquor in the State of Orissa in the name of the partnership Firm M/s Prawin Kumar, pursuant to which an amount of Rs. 34,62,000 from the partnership fund was drawn and deposited towards advance consideration money of aforesaid 10 out still shops. The fact was reflected in the Income Tax Return filed by the firm M/s Prawin Kumar for the year 2003 -04. And whereas the said Satyajit Singh has complained that the partnership Firm M/s Prawin Kumar has been facing difficulties in the matter of liquor business with regard to Income Tax and Sales Tax returns due to non -disclosure of profit and loss of the firm and for that he prayed for inclusion of the names of all the seven partners of the Firm in the licences of aforesaid 10 out still shops; And whereas Sri Prawin Kumar did not disclose at any point of time either about his status or about his financial condition or position or about his entering into partnership deed with Satyajit Singh and others oh 1.4.03 or with Rajesh Ku. Sahu on 1.5.05 to carry on the business in iiquor in respect of the aforesaid 10 out still shops and kept he District Administration in dark, while carrying on the business surreptitiously at the cost of the lawful business associates of two partnership Firms. And whereas for the subterfuge adopted by Sri Prawin Kumar to circumvent the partnership faith, Sri Rajesh Ku. Sahu, who has already invested a huge amount for the aforesaid 10 out still shops and has stood as a local surety, has come forward with a prayer to add his name to the licences of 10 Section shops now held by Prawin Kumar as per the declaration made in the partnership deed dtd. 01.05.05 cited supra. And whereas Prawjn Kumar while applying for renewal of the licences for the year 2008 -09 submitted one solvency certificate issued in his favour by Tahasildar, Champua, Keonjhar, Orissa for Rs. 99,000 only. In addition to that, he has submitted two valuation certificates; 1 -Issued in favour of one Baidyanath Prasad for Rs.i 1,05,554, issued by Anchal Adhikari, Immamganj, Gaya, Bihar, and 2 -issued in favour of Prawin Kumar for Rs. 25,00,000/ -, issued by Anchal Adhikari, Aurangabad, Bihar. As the above two certificates are not solvency certificates and valuation certificates only and as both the certificates were issued outside the State of Orissa, those were not taken Into consideration. Besides, the above three certificates, Prawin Kumar did not submit any Bank Guarantee or local surety. And whereas it is apprehended that it is considered appropriate that unless the names of Sri Satyajit Singh relating partnership deed of 01.04.03 and Sri Rajesh Kumar Sahu of partnership deed of 01.05.05 are added to the licences of 10 Out Still shops held by Prawin Kumar, there might be future litigation resulting in closure of 10 Out Still shops entailing loss of revenue to Govt. Now, therefore, it is hereby ordered that while renewing the licences for the year 2008 -09, names of Sri Rajesh Kumar Sahu and Sri Satyajit Singh should be added provisionally to the licences of 10 Out Still shops, subject to confirmation by the State Government. Sd/ -31.3.08 Collector, Keonjhar