V.KASINATHAN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.S.Sarath Chandran, learned counsel for M/s.K.M.Vijayan Associaes, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.Kumaran, learned Government Advocate (Pondicherry) accepting notice on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for issuance Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from any manner conducting re-auction of the shop bearing No.18(V) of Bangur of Villimur Commune Panchayat and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to shift the arrack shop to Ariyur Village without insisting of any kist from 01.07.2017 till the reopening of the arrack shop.

(3.) The petitioner was a bidder in an auction conducted by the respondents for grant of license to run the arrack shop and the petitioner being a highest bidder in respect of Shop No.18(V) Bangur, license was granted to the petitioner by the second respondent by order dated 30.06.2017 for the period of 01.07.2017 to 30.06.2018 by accepting the petitioner's bid amount of Rs. 7,07,000/-. The petitioner on receipt of the license was not able to run the shop on account of local objections. Therefore, he submitted a representation on 04.08.2017 to the third respondent requesting that he may permitted to shift the shop to another location. In the mean time, the public of the area opposed the location of arrack shop and objection was sent through the local Member of the Legislative Assembly. At that juncture, one Mr.P.Pandian has filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.19056 of 2017 praying for a direction upon the respondents herein to close down the newly opened arrack shops which included the shop for which license was granted in favour of the petitioner. When the writ petition came up before this Court, an interim order was passed on 26.08.2017, directing the respondent to close the shop. Pursuant to which the order passed by the second respondent on 26.08.2017 by closing down three arrack shops which included the shop alloted to the petitioner. The petitioner reported that he had closed down the shop on 31.08.2017. Subsequently, the writ petition was heard by this Court on 05.09.2017 and it was dismissed on the ground that the said writ petitioner was guilty of suppression of material facts and the interim order was also vacated.