Disposed¶26

M/S Amrit Traders v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC16 Sept 2024CWP/10201/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Amrit Traders v. State of H.P.; CWP No. 10201/2024; High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla; Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J; decided 16.09.2024; renewal of L-10BB liquor licence for PY 2024-2025; Rule 11 Himachal Pradesh Liquor License Rules, 1986; office communication dated 12.09.2024, Deputy Commissioner State Taxes & Excise, Kullu; writ petition disposed of without examining merits; liberty to file fresh renewal application; competent authority to decide within four weeks; rights and contentions left open.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to petitioner to submit a fresh application to the competent authority for renewal of its L-10BB Licence for 2024-25; competent authority to decide it in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter. ¶26

M/S Amrit Traders Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to immediately renew the petitioner's Licence L-10BB for PY 2024-2025.

¶16

Court's answer

Without examining the merits of the matter, the writ petition was disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application to the competent authority for renewal of its L-10BB Licence for the year 2024-25.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

If such an application is made, the respondent/competent authority shall decide it and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter, and communicate the decision to the petitioner.

¶26

Key takeaways

All rights and contentions of the parties were expressly left open, and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (CWP No. 10201/2024, HC Himachal Pradesh, decided 16.09.2024, Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J) seeking immediate renewal of petitioner M/s Amrit Traders' L-10BB liquor licence for PY 2024-2025 was disposed of without examining the merits. Respondents had produced an office communication dated 12.09.2024 stating that no renewal application or documents had ever been submitted, and contended that renewal was barred because different premises were sought and the application would fall outside the stipulated period under Rule 11 of the Himachal Pradesh Liquor License Rules, 1986. The petitioner, disputing these assertions, agreed to file a fresh application. The court reserved liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh to the competent authority, which must decide the application in accordance with law within four weeks; all rights and contentions were left open and pending miscellaneous applications were disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 10201/2024 Decided on: 16.09.2024

¶3

M/s Amrit Traders .…Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of H.P. & others …Respondent

¶6

Coram

¶7

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua , Judge.

¶8

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶9

For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Advocate.

¶10

For the respondents : Mr. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sushant Kaprate, Additional Advocate General.

¶11

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

¶12

Notice. Mr. Sushant Kaprate, learned Additional

¶13

Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶14

2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following

¶15

substantive relief:-

¶16

“The respondents may kindly be directed to renew the License-L10BB of the petitioner for the PY 2024-2025 immediately in time bound manner.”

¶17

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had moved an application to respondent No.3 for renewal of its License L-10BB for the year 2024-25, however, no decision

¶18

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

¶19

¶20

thereupon has been communicated to the petitioner by the competent authority, hence, the writ petition.

¶21

Learned Senior Advocate for the respondents has placed on record office communication dated 12.09.2024 from Deputy Commissioner State Taxes & Excise, Kullu, addressed to the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes and Excise (Legal) SDA Complex, Kasumpati, Shimla. In terms of this communication, the petitioner had never submitted any application or any other related documents required for renewal of license with the respondents. As per this communication, the factual pleas made by the petitioner in respect of submission of application for renewal of the liquor license made in paras-10, 11 & 12 of the petition are vague.

¶22

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner disputes the assertions made in the aforesaid office communication dated 12.09.2024, however, the petitioner is ready and willing to make a fresh application, in accordance with law, to respondent No.3 for renewal of petitioner's L- 10BB License for the year 2024-25.

¶23

Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents submitted that the aforesaid liquor license of the petitioner cannot be renewed on the grounds that firstly the petitioner is applying for premises different from the one, for which the license was originally issued in its favour. Secondly the application being made by the petitioner would be

¶24

¶25

beyond the expiry of the stipulated period in terms of Rule 11 of the Himachal Pradesh Liquor License Rules, 1986. However, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents have no objection for considering the application of the petitioner, in accordance with law, and to pass appropriate order thereupon.

¶26

5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by reserving liberty to the petitioner to move appropriate application to the competent authority for renewal of its L-10BB License for the year 2024-25. In case such an application is made, the respondent/competent authority shall decide the same and pass appropriate order thereupon, in accordance with law, within four weeks thereafter. Copy of the decision be communicated to the petitioner. Needless to clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties have been left open. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶27

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶28

16^th September, 2024(Rohit)

M/S Amrit Traders v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Amrit Traders v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Manikaran Roller Floor Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Dev Bhoomi Angora Spining Mills and Allied Industries

Hari Chand Vs Union of India and Others

Chanju Ram Vs Er. Ashok Bhopal

Chinta Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

The Higher Education Insititution Society Vs National Council for Teacher Educaiton and Others

Damodar Dass Vs the Project Director NHAI and Another