Disposed¶28

M/S Rabditta Corporates v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 May 2025CWP/9710/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revocation of liquor licence, UT Chandigarh; withdrawal of police NOC for noise pollution; Kala Ghoda, Sector-26; compliance verification by Administration committee; affidavit of perpetual noise-norm compliance; Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000; Punjab Police Act 2007 Ss.58-61; undertaking to reconsider licence within two weeks; writ petition disposed of; no cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Respondent-Administration to consider the petitioner's case for grant of liquor licence within two weeks in accordance with law; petitioner's affidavit undertaking compliance with prescribed noise levels taken on record. ¶28

M/S Rabditta Corporates Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 24.03.2025 of the Collector (Excise)-cum-Additional Excise & Taxation Commissioner, UT, Chandigarh revoking the petitioner's liquor licence upon withdrawal of its police no objection certificate on grounds of noise pollution should be set aside. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

In the light of the petitioner's affidavit undertaking permanent compliance with the prescribed noise levels and the inspection report dated 28.04.2025, the respondent-Administration stated that the petitioner's case for grant of liquor licence shall be considered within two weeks, in accordance with law.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The respondent-Administration's undertaking satisfied learned counsel for the petitioner and the petition was accordingly disposed of without further adjudication.

¶28

Key takeaways

The court proceeded on the strength of the petitioner's affidavit undertaking perpetual compliance with the prescribed noise levels, thereby addressing the compliance concern that underlay the withdrawal of the NOC.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (coram: Deepak Sibal and Lapita Banerji JJ.; oral judgment delivered by Deepak Sibal J.) disposed of CWP-9710-2025(O&M) preferred by M/s Rabditta Corporates, a partnership firm running the establishment “Kala Ghoda” in Sector-26, Chandigarh, challenging the order dated 24.03.2025 of the Collector (Excise)-cum-Additional Excise & Taxation Commissioner, UT, Chandigarh revoking its liquor licence consequent upon withdrawal by the Chandigarh Police of the no objection certificate granted to it, on the ground that it was causing noise pollution. After counsel for the petitioner stated (22.04.2025) that the defects had been cured, a committee of the respondent-Administration inspected the premises and found them compliant with the noise pollution norms on the day of inspection (report dated 28.04.2025); the petitioner thereafter filed an affidavit undertaking to abide, for all times, with the prescribed noise levels under Sections 58 to 61 of the Punjab Police Act, 2007 and the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. In the light of the affidavit and the inspection report, the respondent-Administration undertook that the petitioner's case for grant of the liquor licence would be considered within two weeks in accordance with law; the petitioner's counsel expressed satisfaction and the petition was disposed of. No precedent was cited or discussed.

¶1

CWP-9710-2025(O&M) :1:

¶2

143(3) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP-9710-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 23.05.2025

¶4

M/S RABDITTA CORPORATES

¶5

...Petitioner

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

¶10

Present: Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate for respondent-UT, Chandigarh.

¶12

¶13

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

¶14

The petitioner is a partnership firm running an establishment by the name of “Kala Ghoda” in Sector-26, Chandigarh. Through an order dated 24.03.2025, passed by the Collector (Excise)-cum-Additional Excise & Taxation Commissioner, UT, Chandigarh (for short, the Collector), on the withdrawal of a no objection certificate granted to the petitioner by the Chandigarh Police on the ground that the petitioner was causing noise pollution, the petitioner’s liquor licence was revoked. The afore referred order of the Collector is the subject matter of challenge through the instant petition.

¶15

On 22.04.2025 learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶16

Priyanka Thakur 2025.05.28 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CWP-9710-2025(O&M) :2:

¶18

made a statement that the defects on the basis whereof NOC of the petitioner had been withdrawn by the Chandigarh Police, leading to the revocation of its liquor licence, stood cured by the petitioner resulting in the noise levels being emitted from its business premises compliant with the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 (for short, the 2000 Rules) and Sections 58 to 61 of the Punjab Police Act, 2007 (for short, the 2007 Act).

¶19

On the making of the afore statement, Mr. Jhanji submitted that without prejudice to the stand taken by the respondents in their written statement, the business premises of the petitioner shall be inspected to verify the afore claim and a report in this regard shall be submitted on or before the adjourned date.

¶20

In terms of the above statement of Mr. Jhanji, a committee was constituted by the respondent-Administration which inspected the premises of the petitioner and found that on the day of the inspection the petitioner was confirming with the noise pollution norms set out by the respondent-Administration.

¶21

Today, an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner in Court which is ordered to be taken on record. As per the said affidavit, the petitioner undertake to abide, for all times in the future, with the noise levels being emitted from its business premises, in conformity with the relevant provisions of the 2007 Act and the 2000 Rules.

¶22

In the light of the filing of the afore affidavit and the

¶23

Priyanka Thakur 2025.05.28 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CWP-9710-2025(O&M) :3:

¶25

inspection report dated 28.04.2025 Mr.Ghai states that the petitioner’s case for the grant of liquor licence shall now be considered by the respondent-Administration within two weeks, in accordance with law.

¶26