DEEPAK ASSARAM DEOSINGHANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by holders of country and foreign liquor vending licences is directed against notice of demand, whereby the respondents claimed revised licence fees for the year 2001-02 on account of availability of census figures for the year 2001.

(2.) It is petitioners' case that the petitioners hold licences for vending foreign and country liquor in Nagpur. The licence fees for the year 2001-2002 was fixed by notification dated 30th January, 2001. The petitioners paid this fees. This schedule of fees in notification dated 30th January, 2001 prescribes different rates for licences in cities and towns based on the population of such city or town. On availability of census figures for 2001, as it was found that City of Nagpur had a population of more than twenty lacs, higher licence fees was payable under the notification of 30th January, 2001. This was demanded by the impugned demand notice issued in February, 2002.

(3.) It is petitioners' contention that such fees at higher rate could not have been demanded, since the census figures for the last preceding census which were available and published at the time of fixing licence fees were for 1991 census and 2001, figures were yet to be finalized and published. Therefore, they filed this petition to have those demand notices quashed and set aside.