AJIT KUMAR ROUTRAY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Writ Petitions have been filed with a common prayer to quash Notification No.1964/Ex dated 23.03.2013 (hereinafter referred to as "Excise Policy") and subsequent order No.2158/Ex. dated 05.04.2013 (for short, "Order") issued by the Government of Odisha in Excise Department prescribing the procedure to be followed in conducting "e -auction" to settle the IMFL OFF Shops and Country Liquor Shops for the excise year 2013 -14 on the ground that such Excise Policy and order are without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (in short 'the Act") and the Orissa Excise Rules, 1965 (in short "the Rules"), arbitrary, irrational, discriminatory, mala fide and unworkable.

(2.) SINCE the grounds of challenge in all the writ petitions are almost similar, for the purpose of convenience, all those grounds of challenge are dealt in this judgment.

(3.) PER contra, opposite party -State has filed counter affidavit in W.P.(C) No.8084 of 2013 taking various stands opposing the contentions taken by the petitioners. Mr. Ashok Mohanty, learned Advocate General submitted that the State adopts the counter filed in W.P.(C) No.8084 of 2013 in all the writ petitions. The preliminary objection raised by learned Advocate General is that the writ petitions are not maintainable either in law or in fact. Some writ petitioners are existing licensees, who are granted licences during the excise year to year beginning from 1st of April and ending on 31st of March and as such renewal or otherwise of the existing licence is the prerogative of the Government. There is no vested right with the petitioners, either statutory or fundamental, to continue 6 with the existing licence and to challenge the procedure or modalities prescribed by the authority under the Act. The petitioners therefore, have no locus standi to maintain the writ petitions and hence, the same are liable to be dismissed.