GEORGE JOSEPH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A partnership firm, having a hotel, was given Ext.P5 provisional FL-11 licence to have a Beer & Wine Parlour. One of the partners, whose claim to be the Managing Partner is contested, filed W.P. (C) No.19121 of 2015 assailing Ext.P5 provisional licence. He obtained an order of status quo. The Commissioner of Excise, pending the said writ petition, in compliance with the direction of this Court in a writ appeal arising out of another writ petition, heard the rival claimants and recalled Ext.P5 provisional licence through Ext.P8.

(2.) Impugning Ext.P8 order of the Excise Commissioner, the partnership firm, represented by another Managing Partner, filed W.P. (C) No.30282 of 2015 arraying the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.19121 of 2014 as the 4th respondent. Since both the writ petitions raise the same issue involving the same parties on either side, this Court disposes of both the writ petitions through a common judgement. For the narrative purpose, the facts and the documents from W.P. (C) No.30282 of 2015 are taken as the basis.

(3.) Briefly stated, as pleaded in W.P.(C) No. 30282 of 2015, the petitioner firm initially had a bar licence beginning from 1986 under Rule 13(3) of the Foreign Liquor Rules ('the Rules' for brevity). Until 2006, the firm was headed by one Mr. K. A. George, the managing partner, in whose name ostensibly the licence stood. When the said managing partner took ill in 2006, the firm comprising six partners nominated the 4th respondent, holding 30% share, to be the managing partner. In 2010, as Mr. K.A. George, the then managing partner, had died, the remaining partners reconstituted the partnership firm.