RAJU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are filed to strike down Rule 3(11-C) of the Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968 and also to declare that the notification dated 23.9.2016 issued by respondent No.1 and the consequential intimation dated 6.10.2016 issued by respondent No.2 are without authority of law and to quash the order dated 27.9.2018 passed by respondent No.2.

(2.) Petitioners are all running liquor shops after obtaining CL-2 licence from the competent Authority under the provisions of the Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968 (for short 'Rules ). The licences granted to petitioners are in terms of Rules 12(3(b) of the Rules.

(3.) The 1st respondent amended the Rules by inserting Rule 3(11-C ) of the Rules w.e.f. 1.7.2003 by giving overriding effect. Rule 3(11-C) of the Rules specifies that a license in Form CL(11-C) shall be granted by the Deputy Commissioner only to such companies owned or controlled by the State Government and specified by the government for possession and sale of liquor in retail shops. Petitioners are aggrieved by insertion of Rule 3(11-C) of the Rules wherein the licence to run retail sale liquor outlet are granted to Government owned/controlled companies without reference to or applicability of Rule 12 of the Rules. Petitioners are also aggrieved by notification and circular issued by respondent No.1 approving 900 CL (11-C) licence in favour of respondent No.5 in various locations in the State of Karnataka and also the CL-11-C granted in favour of respondent No.5. Hence, these writ petitions.