GAPPULAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Excise authorities and the Collector, Gwalior, not to enforce the notice bf demand (Annexure 2) issued by the Collector.

(2.) IN an auction of country liquor shops the petitioner being the highest bidder, got a group of five shops situate at Gwalior for the period 1969-70 (from April 1, 1969 to March 31, 1970). One of the terms of the sale memo was that the contractor would have to lift a prescribed minimum quantity of liquor and pay duty or consolidated duty at the prevalent rate, otherwise he would have to pay duty on the quantity short of the minimum prescribed. IN accordance with this condition the District Excise Officer, Gwalior, issued a notice of demand for Rs. 2,90,502.76 P. as arrears of land revenue and threatened to recover the amount as such. The petitioner challenges this notice of demand and contends that the demand is not authorised by Jaw.

(3.) THIS position of the law is settled in Bimal Chand Banerjee v. State of M. P,1971 M P L J 168=1970 J L J 902 (S C) and Jagannath Prasad v. State of M. P(Civil Appeal No. 308 of 1970. which appeals were decided by their Lordships of the Supreme Court by a common judgment dated August 19, 1970' on a consideration of sections 25, 27, 62 (1) and 62 (2) (d) and (h) of the Excise Act. Their Lordships held:-