P JITENDER RAO Vs. EXCISE SUPERINTENDENT KARIMNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AUCTIONS were held on 3-10-90 The licensee has complied with all formalities on 12-10-90. When the demand was made for the entire month of October 90 the petitioner filed this writ petition stating that he is entitled for the benefits for the 12 days i.e, from 1-10-90 to 12-10-90 and the department is not entitled to demand the rentals for the said period. The learned Govt. Pleader submits that since the petitioner has already lifted the maximum guarantee quantity for the month of October, 1990 and has also executed the counter-part agreement and paid the amount, the question of giving relief under article 226 of the Constitution of India does not arise.

(2.) IT is an admitted case that under the rules the petitioner has got certain time for complying with the conditions for execution of the agreement. In this case 10 days time has been allowed and within that time the petitioner has complied with the conditions. Now the question ie. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of renttal from 1-10-90 to 12-10-90. The mere fact that a counter part agreement is executed does not mean that the petitioner has lost his claim of getting rentals for that period as there is no licence granted for him. From 1-10-90 to 12-10-90 the petitioner has no authorisation to sell the liquor. When there is no licence granted to the petitioner to sell the liquor, the question of interpretation of the counter-agreement that he agreed to pay the rentals for the whole year does not arise at all. Therefore the petitioner is entitled to the proportionate relief for the period from 1-10-90 to 12-10-90. With this direction the Writ Petition disposed of. No Costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 250/-