Petitioner challenged notice to refund license fee shop was closed due to govt orders. Court noted Supreme Court decision rendered to release amounts upon deposit and disposed writ.
Petitioner to deposit disputed amount with Excise Department within four weeks to secure release of security amount and other applicable amounts.
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.
(1 of 2)
[CW-3099/2021]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3099/2021
Madan Lal Jat S/o Kalu Lal Jat, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Sahanva, Chittorgarh.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Joshi Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Advocate General with Mr. K.S. Lodha Advocate through Video Conferencing.
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Judgment / Order
02/08/2022
The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the notice issued in pursuance of clauses 4.6 and 3.18 of the Excise Policy 2020-21 and to refund the license fee received from the petitioner for the period, for which the shop remained closed owing to orders passed by the State Government and the Central Government.
Mr. M.S. Singhvi, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. K.S. Lodha advocate representing the respondents, urged that a bunch of writ petitions led by D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10936/2020 (Satveer Chaudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) involving identical controversy has been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court at Jaipur vide
(2 of 2)
[CW-3099/2021]
order dated 08.12.2020 and hence, the instant writ petition may also be dismissed.
However, Mr. Girish Joshi, learned counsel representing the petitioner, submitted that the order passed by the learned Division Bench in the case of Satveer Chaudhary (supra) has been assailed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.837-838/2021 (Het Ram Meel & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.), wherein a direction has been given to release the security amounts and other applicable amounts to the litigants therein subject to the condition that petitioner deposits the disputed amounts with the Excise Department within a period of four weeks.
Accordingly, it is hereby directed that the petitioner shall deposit the disputed amount with the respondent Excise Department within a period of four weeks from today, whereupon the security amount and all other applicable amounts shall be released in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law. The rights of the petitioner shall be governed by the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Het Ram Meel (supra).
The writ petition is disposed off in the aforesaid terms. The stay application is also disposed off
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ
Sanjay Kumawat-16
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of license fee considering Supreme Court direction in related litigation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satveer Chaudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Referred¶17
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10936/2020
Het Ram Meel & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.Distinguished¶21
SLP No.837-838/2021
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Madan Lal Jat
State Of Rajasthan
Vinod Kumar Bharwani
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
