Shambhu Nath Tiwary vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the four respondents.

Instant writ application was filed for direction upon the respondents, especially to the respondent no. 4 to refund the security amount and two

months’ advance licence fee as petitioner has already tendered his application on 31.10.2011 and surrendered his licence under Section 44 of

Bihar Excise Act, 1915, which expired on 31.03.2012. Further prayer has been made for direction upon the respondents, especially to the respondent

no. 4 to supply statement of accounts of the petitioner for the entire period i.e. from 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2012, during which, transactions were made

by the respondents with the petitioner and subsequently through the unauthorized persons, who were simply made partners in the business and in its

profit and loss and not authorized for any business transactions with respondents being forbidden in the Act, Rules and Terms of license.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the license for sale of foreign liquors in retail was granted in favour of this petitioner for the period

from 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2012 with annual license fee of Rs.10,28,585/- and monthly license fee of Rs.85,715/- and the terms and conditions of the

license was enumerated, which has been attached as Annexure-1. Learned counsel further submitted that due to some personal and financial

difficulties, he submitted an application under Section 44 of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 for surrender of his license before the Deputy Commissioner,

Jamshedpur on 31st October, 2011, which has been attached as annexure-3 and requested for acceptance of surrender of the license. Thereafter,

respondent no. 4, Assistant Commissioner, Excise, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur informed the petitioner that as per the provision, the license fee of the

entire license period has to be deposited, which was not done by the petitioner, therefore, he was directed to deposit the same. Thereafter, the

surrender application will be transmitted for acceptance before the Excise Commissioner, Jharkhand, Ranchi, which has been attached as annexure-5.

This petitioner on 23.11.2011 again submitted an application, which has been attached as annexure-4 to this writ application. Learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that the authorities concerned have not accepted the surrender of license and have raised a demand of Rs.86,82,432/- for the

entire period of license.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents submitted that during financial year 2011-12, this petitioner was license holder of 11

retail excise shops with the monthly license fees of all the 11 shops of Rs.23,40,257/- which has been annexed as annexure-D to the supplementary to

the counter affidavit, filed on 24.09.2019. Learned counsel further submitted that since this petitioner has not deposited the amount, as demanded vide

annexure-5, therefore, the license during the financial period persisted and remained with this petitioner. Since demanded amount was not deposited by

this petitioner, therefore, the authorities, at the time of settlement, have adjusted the amount of Rs.23,40,257/-, as security deposit and Rs. 46,80,510/-

as two months’ advance license fee and on adjustment, the pending dues with petitioner remained Rs.2,13,352/-, for which the authorities have

filed certificate case, which is pending as Certificate Case No. 3 of 2012-13 before the Certificate Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, and has

been marked as annexure I/1.

Considering the above submissions of the parties as well as the provisions of the Act as also the terms and condition of the license, it appears that

the petitioner has requested the authorities for surrender of the license in midway, but, did not comply with the provisions of Section 44 of the Act and

also not deposited the amount, demanded by the authorities. It further appears that the amount of this petitioner, which was lying deposit with the

authorities have been adjusted and for remaining amount, a certificate case has already been lodged. Since the surrender of license in a midway was

not complied and in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules and the terms and condition of the license, therefore, there is no ground

for interference in the matter.

In the result, instant writ application is dismissed.

Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the court of the Certificate Officer, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.