BHANU JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Tarun Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri S. D. Dubey on behalf of the respondents/opposite parties.

(2.) BHANU Jaiswal and Vimal Kumar Goeinka, the two petitioners have approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned notice dated 19-2-2006 issued by the Excise Officer, Varanasi, respondent No. 4 (copy filed as Annexure-8 to the writ petition) and also a similar writ commanding the respondents (mainly Executive Officer Cantonment Board, Varanasi) to issue a trade licence/no objection certificate to the petitioners under Section 210 of the Cantonment Act, 1924 (hereinafter called as the Act ).

(3.) THE permission sought by the petitioner from the Cantonment Board was rejected by means of Cantonment Board Resolution No. 9, dated 31-8-2004. THE said fact finds mention in the letter dated 17- 1-2005 written by the Executive Officer Cantonment Board, Varanasi (Annexure-4 to the writ petition ).