S AVTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was granted a licence in Form No. FL 1 in regard to a shop in Marhatal Jabalpur, for the period between 1-4-1984 and 31-3-1986. The licence fee pyable by the petitioner was Rs. 14,01,000. 00. We are unformed that 1/6 of the total licence fee being Rs. 2,33,000. 00 was deposited by the petitioner before starting the shop and the balance of the licence fee was to be deposited in monthly instalments of Rs. 58. 37s. 00. The petitioner was also required to furnish bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 1,16,750. 00 to ensure regular payment of monthly instalments of the licence fee. It would be seen that the sum of Rs. 1,16,750. 00 represents the amount of two monthly instalments.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that the monthly instalments of the licence fee were paid by him regularly upto 31-8-1984, that on 31-10-1984, for reasons beyond his control and stated in the writ petition, the shop of the petitioner was burnt and looted; that by latter dated 7-11-1984, a copy whereof has been attached as Annexure IV to the writ petition, he surrendered his licence; that a copy of the said letter was also handed over in person to the Collector and District Excise Officer on 16-11-1984 and that the district Excise Officer, on behalf of the Collector, passed an order on the said application on 22-11-1984, a copy whereof has been attached as Annexure XIV to the writ petition. It has further been stated in the writ petition that the Collector also served on the petitioner a notice dated 9-11-1984, a copy whereof has been attached as annexure VII to the writ petition requiring him to show cause within three days of the receipt of the notice, as to why for non-payment of the monthly instalments of licence fee for the month of September to November 1984, his licence may not be cancelled and the shop may not be re-auctioned. It is on these allegations that the present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

(3.) RETURN has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been admitted that the letter dated 7-11-1984 referred to above, was received on 12-11-1984. It has also been admitted in the said return that a copy of the application dated 7-11-1984 was handed over personally to the Collecotor on 16-11-1984. From the material on record, it further appears that between 27-11-1984 and 15-2-1985, the shop was being run by the Government itself, whereas a fresh licence was granted to the father of the petitioner with effect from 15-2-1985 for the remainder of the period for which licence had been grated to the petitioner and the licence fee for this fresh grant was Rs. 6,70,000. 00.