A RAVIKUMAR Vs. COMMISSIONER PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant applied for grant of IMFL retail vending licence in Division No. 28 of Salem Corporation on 09. 07. 2001 complying with all the statutory requirements as per the notification dated 01. 07. 2001 issued by the collector of Salem. The drawal of the lot was conducted on 12. 07. 200. Only two applications were received for the said division thought three shops were notified. The appellant was one among the two. Since the eligible applicants were less than the number of shops notified in that area, the appellant was selected as successful bidder, but had failed to remit 2/3rd of the amount of privilege fee on the same day, i. e. , on 12. 07. 2001. Hence, the Assistant Commissioner (Excise) Salem Division by his proceedings dated 12. 07. 2001 ordered for forfeiture of the sum of Rs. 4,66,700/- deposited by the petitioner at the time of filing the application under the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Retail Vending) Rules, 1989. Against that order, the appellant filed a revision before the Collector and further revision before the commissioner of Prohibition and Excise. Both the collector and the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise confirmed the order of the original authority.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed writ petition No. 5634 of 2003 before this Court seeking for the relief of issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the respondents in their respective proceedings forfeiting the amount and quash the same and direct the respondents to refund the 1/3rd of the privilege amount of Rs. 4,66,700/- with interest at 24% per annum from 12. 07. 2001 till the date it was realised. The learned single Judge non suited the petitioner by dismissing the writ petition. The correctness of the said order is canvassed in this appeal before this Court.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.