Allowed

Rajiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC4 Sept 2012CWJC/14073/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition filed by a liquor shop trader who was the second bidder. The Court held that under the sale Notification, upon cancellation of the first bidder's licence, the right to the remaining period vested in the second bidder. The authorities were directed to issue the licence to the petitioner and cancel the current settlement.

What did the court decide?

Directed the authorities to grant a retail liquor licence to the petitioner for the remaining period up to March 31, 2013, within 15 days and refund the amount paid by the respondent-four.

Rajiv Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14073 of 2012

¶3

====================================================== Rajiv Kumar, son of Laxmi Narain Sao, resident of village- Dhamaul, P.S. Dhamaul, District Nawadah. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary to the State Government Excise and Prohibition Department, Bihar, Patna 2. The Collector, Nawadah 3. The Superintendent of Excise, Nawadah 4. Laxman Prasad, Son of Late Sidheshwar Prasad, resident of villageBahera, P.O. Baghibardiha, P.S. Warsaliganj, District Nawadah. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Advocate. For the Respondent-State: Mr. Vikash Kumar, A.C. to A.G. For the Respondent no. 4: Mr. Vinod Shankar Modi Mr. Binay Krishna, Advocates.

¶4

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and

¶5

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

¶6

ORAL ORDER

¶7

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶8

4 04-09-2012 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by one Rajiv Kumar to assert his right to dealership in respect of a group of liquor shops for country made liquor and a composite shop in Nawadah Municipal Council, pursuant to the sale Notification for the year 2012-13.

¶9

Pursuant to a public advertisement, the petitioner applied for licence for retail liquor shops “Group-7” in Nawadah Municipal Council. The settlement was made by auction in favour of one Prem Sagar. The licence granted to the said Prem Sagar came to be cancelled on 18^th June 2012. Pursuant to the cancellation of the said licence, a fresh advertisement was issued

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.14073 of 2012 (4) dt.04-09-2012

¶11

2 / 4

¶12

for settlement of retail licence for “Group-7 shops”. The public notice was issued on 30^th June 2012 and the settlement was made in favour of the respondent no. 4 on the same day.

¶13

Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. Learned Advocate Mr. Satyabir Bharti has appeared for the petitioner. He has submitted that sale Notification specifically mentions that in case of cancellation of settlement of licence made in favour of the first bidder, the settlement would be made in favour of the second bidder for the remaining period. In the submission of Mr. Bharti, in the auction conducted for the year 2012-13, the petitioner was the second bidder. In case of cancellation of licence granted to Mr. Prem Sagar, it was the petitioner who was entitled to settlement of licence for the remaining period. Ignoring the said provision, the District Magistrate has granted the licence for the remaining period by auction sale to third person, the respondent no. 4. The petitioner was not aware of cancellation of licence granted to the aforesaid Prem Sagar; nor had he had the opportunity to compete in the auction sale conducted on 30^th June 2012. Mr. Bharti has submitted that the petitioner is entitled to the settlement of licence in respect of “Group-7 shops” in Nawadah Municipal Council as a matter of right.

¶14

Learned Advocate Mr. Vikas Kumar has appeared for the respondents- State of Bihar. He has contested the writ petition. He has submitted that according to Clause 4(Ka) of the sale Notification, settlement in favour of the second rank bidder is permitted only in case the first rank bidder does not accept the settlement or the settlement made in favour of the first rank bidder is cancelled on the same day i.e. on the date of auction sale. In the

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.14073 of 2012 (4) dt.04-09-2012

¶16

3 / 4

¶17

present case, the settlement made in favour of the first rank bidder and the licence granted to him was cancelled months after the date of the licence. Clause 4(Ka), therefore, is not attracted. The petitioner is not entitled to settlement or licence automatic being the second rank bidder.

¶18

Learned Advocate Mr. Vinod Shankar Modi has appeared for the respondent no. 4. He has submitted that the respondent no. 4 was a bona fide bidder pursuant to the advertisement dated 30^th June 2012. If at all the settlement has wrongly been made in favour of the respondent no. 4, the respondent no. 4 should not be put to a loss.

¶19

The sale Notification is produced on the record of the writ Petition. Clause 4(Ka) is explicit. The said Clause expressly provides that in case of cancellation of licence granted to the first bidder, the licence for the remaining period would be settled in favour of the second bidder and in absence of the second bidder to the third bidder.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid express provision in the sale Notification, the right asserted by the writ petitioner has to be accepted.

¶21

For the aforesaid reasons the Petition is allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to grant retail licence or make settlement in respect of “Group-7 retail liquor shops in favour of the petitioner for the remaining licence period i.e. up to 31^st March 2013. Such settlement shall be made within 15 days from today. The petitioner will be liable to pay legitimate fees, security deposit, etc. The settlement made in favour of the respondent no. 4 will be cancelled. The security deposit and the advance licence fee paid by the respondent no. 4 will be refunded to the respondent

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.14073 of 2012 (4) dt.04-09-2012

¶23

4 / 4

¶24

no. 4 after adjusting the amount payable by the respondent no. 4 within 15 days from today.

¶25

Parties will bear their own cost.

¶26

(R.M. Doshit, CJ)

¶27

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Sujit/-

Rajiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Secretary State Technical Vs Kant Lal Coudhary and Ors.

Kameshwar Prasad Singh Vs the Patna University and Ors.

The State of Bihar and Ors. Vs Phanindra Nath Pandey

M/s Priya Timbar Patna Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kanchan Kumari Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

St. Michael's Education Association Vs The Union Of India and Ors.