Dismissed

M/s.Ajantha Wines v. The Commissioner (Excise)

Madras HC21 Dec 2020WP/16862/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a suspension order under Article 226. Finding no infirmity in the suspension order, despite an adverse order passed later by the Deputy Commissioner on a remand, the Court dismissed the plea but granted liberty to challenge the subsequent order via statutory appeal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty granted to challenge the subsequent adverse order dated 17.12.2020 by way of statutory appeal.

M/s.Ajantha Wines Vs The Commissioner (Excise) — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 21.12.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶5

W.P. No.16862 of 2020 and

¶6

WMP. Nos.20918, 20923 and 20929 of 2020

¶7

M/s.Ajantha Wines

¶8

License No.75/FL2 Rep. by its Sole Proprietor Thiru.G.V.K.Moorthy

¶9

No.45 Vaniyar Street

¶10

Thirukanur Puducherry - 605 501 ..Petitioner

¶11

.Vs.

¶12

The Commissioner (Excise) Government of Puducherry Office of the Excise Commissioner Chief Secretariat Puducherry - 605 001.

¶13

The Deputy Commissioner (Excise) Excise Department Government of Puducherry Thattanchavadi Puducherry. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in proceedings No.12728/DCE/SQD/Dry Day/2014(Part - IV) dated 12.04.2020 and quash the same and consequently forbear the first and second respondents from interfering with the busines of the petitioner under license no.75 FL2 except in accordance with law.

¶15

Both learned counsel would state that pursuant to the order of remand dated 12.08.2020, the 2^nd respondent/The Deputy Commissioner (Excise), Excise Department has passed an order dated 17.12.2020, adverse to the petitioner.

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

In the light of the same, there is no infirmity in the order of suspension dated 12.04.2020 impugned before me now. This writ petition is thus dismissed. Liberty is, however, granted to the petitioner to challenge order dated 17.12.2020 by way of statutory appeal in accordance with law. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

¶18

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(L.A)

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Commissioner (Excise)
Government of Puducherry Office of the
Excise Commissioner Chief Secretariat
Puducherry - 605 001.
2. The Deputy Commissioner (Excise)
Excise Department
Government of Puducherry
Thattanchavadi Puducherry.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, (Pondy) SR.No.42766
W.P. No.16862 of 2020
and
WMP. Nos.20918, 20923 and 20929 of 2020
rr ii (18/01/2021)

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s.Ajantha Wines v. The Commissioner (Excise)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Ajantha Wines v. The Commissioner (Excise)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.P.Murthy Vs The District Collector

N.Balasubramanian Vs The Commissioner

Hotel Jaya Puspham Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Commissioner

Venu Residency Vs Assistant Commissioner (St)

M/s.Edac Engineering Ltd., Vs The Commissioner

M/S.Rk Textiles (India) Vs Assistant. Commissioner of Income Tax