GOPAL PRASADS Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JAUNPUR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri A. P. Shahi, holding brief of Sri R. N. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioners, and Sri Vinay Malviya. learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

(2.) At an auction for privilege to sell liquor and Bhang, held on 26th March, 1984, the petitioners were the highest bidders. Their bid was for Rs. 6,01,000. It appears, the bids of the petitioners did not attain finality, and there was re-auction on 4th April, 1984 wherein the highest bid was for Rs. 5,75,000. The authorities held this bid to be Inadequate. This led to third auction, which was held on 6th April, 1984. In the third auction, the highest bid offered was for a sum of Rs. 4,05,000. It was accepted. Obviously, there is a difference of Rs. 1,96,000 between the bid of the petitioners and the bid offered at the third auction on 6th April, 1984 and accepted. This difference was considered to be a loss to the State, and is sought to be recovered from the petitioners as arrears of land revenue. The petitioners have approached this Court and pray that the respondents may be prohibited from recovering the said amount as arrears of land revenue.

(3.) Contention of Sri Shahi, in the forefront, is that the money sought to be recovered from the petitioners cannot be realised as arrears of land revenue inasmuch as neither there is any statutory provision empowering the State to recover the amount in question as arrears of land revenue nor is there any agreement between the petitioners and the State providing for recovery of the amount as arrears of land revenue. According to Sri Shahi, the only course available to the State was to file a civil suit as is contemplated under Rule 180 of the Rules under the U. P. Excise Act. 1910.