RAJANAMANI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner has made an application to transfer Excise Licence in Form CL -9 standing in the name of Sri H.M. Srinivas into her name. Said application was submitted on 28.2.2013 along with the challan for having remitted the transfer fee. Though 4th respondent - Deputy Commissioner of Excise, Mandya, recommended the case of the petitioner for transfer of Licence, the transfer having not been effected, this Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 13.6.2013 as at Annexure -J without insisting upon additional transfer fee being remitted and for grant of consequential reliefs. Sri Narendra Gowda, learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the non -consideration of the application dated 28.2.2013 submitted by the petitioner seeking transfer of CL -9 licence in favour of the petitioner standing in the name of Sri H.M. Srinivas is arbitrary and illegal. Learned counsel further submitted that there is a discretionary treatment given to the petitioner and in the circumstances, the respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's application seeking transfer as well as the representation as at Annexure -J submitted on 13.6.2013 and pass lawful order.

(2.) SRI T.K. Vedamurthy, learned High Court Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, on the other hand submitted that the matter is squarely covered by an order dated 1.7.2013 passed in Writ Petition No. 23735/2013 and connected cases and unless the petitioner remits the stipulated fee and complies with the lawful requirements, the transfer of licence sought for by her cannot be effected and the licence renewed. Learned counsel further submitted that soon after the petitioner remits the fee in terms of the amended Rule and complies with all the lawful requirements, the respondents would take action without any delay.