STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. AJUDHIA NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment we shall dispose of Civil Appeals Nos. 1665 and 1666 of 1970, in which common questions of law have arisen for determination by this Court.

(2.) The facts leading to the two appeals are undisputed and may be briefly stated thus. Licences to run liquor vends in various parts of Punjab during the financial year 1965-66 were sold by public auction shortly before the 1st April, 1965. Auctions were held at numerous places subject to identical conditions which were supplied to the bidders in writing. Condition No, 8 which is material for our purposes is reproduced below:

(3.) Mr. Dhillon, learned counsel for the appellants has drawn our attention to The State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, AIR 1977 SC 1717) which reversed the Judgment of Gurdev Singh, J., mentioned above and has contended that the very basis of the impugned judgment has consequently fallen to the ground. The contention is correct. As pointed out in Bilbir Singh's case (supra) the judgment of Gurdev Singh, J., in Civil Writ Petition No. 2021 of 1966 had proceeded merely on the ground that the petitioner firm therein had not been given an opportunity of being heard in relation to the demand notice issued to it for payment of the still-head duty on the entire minimum quantity of liquor which that firm was required to lift under the licence. In differing with the view expressed by Gurdev Singh, J., this Court made a reference to the following observations of Chandrachud, J., (as he then was) in Har Shankar v. The Dy. Excise and Taxation Commissioner, (1975) 3 SCR 254 which was followed in Shyam Lal v. State of Punjab AIR 1976 SC 2045):