This judgment deals with three connected writ petitions challenging refund notices under the Excise Temperance Policy. Granted pending Supreme Court ruling in Het Ram Meel, petitioners must deposit disputed amounts to get security refunds.
Directed petitioners to deposit disputed amount within four weeks for release of security and other 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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3239/2021
Raju Singh S/o Purn Singh, Aged About 38 Years, B/c Rajput, R/ o Gopalpura Road, Ward No. 4, Sujangarh.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
Connected With
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7048/2021
Laxmi Sharma W/o Ajay Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, B/c Sharma, R/o Adangarh, Distt. Jhunjhunu.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7050/2021
Hirtu D/o Maniram, Aged About 23 Years, B/c Mali, R/o Buchavas, Taranagar, Churu.
----Petitioner
Versus
(2 of 3)
[CW-3239/2021]
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. Rishabh Handa on behalf of |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Girish Joshi | ||
| For Respondent(s) | : | Mr. Girish Kumar Sankhla |
HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
11/05/2022
The instant writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners challenging the notice issued in pursuance of clauses 4.6 and 3.18 of the Excise Temperance Policy 2020-21 and to refund the licence fee received from the petitioners for the period, for which the shop remained closed owing to orders passed by the State Government and the Central Government.
Mr. Girish Kumar Sankhla, learned counsel 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 order dated 08.12.2020 and hence, the instant writ petitions may also be dismissed.
However, Mr. Rishabh Handa, associate to Mr. Girish Joshi, learned counsel representing the petitioners, submitted that the order passed by the learned Division Bench in the case of
(3 of 3)
[CW-3239/2021]
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 they deposit the disputed amounts with the Excise Department within a period of four weeks.
Accordingly, it is hereby directed that the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law. The rights of the petitioners shall be governed by the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Het Ram Meel (supra).
The writ petitions are disposed off in these terms. The stay applications are also disposed off.
(FARJAND ALI),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACJ 1-3 Ravi Kh/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to direct deposit of disputed amount for release of security and licence fee
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Het Ram Meel & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.Referred¶35
SLP No.837-838/2021 (Het Ram Meel & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
Raju Singh S/o Purn Singh
State Of Rajasthan
Laxmi Sharma W/o Ajay Sharma
Hirtu D/o Maniram
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
Farjand Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
