The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous because the respondent rejected the licensee's request to delete a co-licensee and renew the license solely in the petitioner's name under Section 11 of the U.P. Excise Act, providing a direct appeal remedy.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 39
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 239 of 2021
Petitioner :- Ram Darash Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
The petitioner seeks mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to delete the name of co-licensee Ishwar Yadav from the license of country made liquor shop, Parsaha (14582) and renew the license on the name of sole licensee Ram Darash.
Learned Standing Counsel has received instructions from the office of the District Magistrate, Azamgarh and submit that by order dated 05.02.2021, the aforesaid application of the petitioner has been rejected.
The petitioner has a remedy of filing an appeal under Section 11 of the U.P.Excise Act.
In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Order Date :- 18.3.2021 SKD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative appeal remedy exists.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ram Darash
State Of U.P.
Respondent No.2
Sunita Agarwal
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
