P.RAMESH RAO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ application has been filed in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation challenging the notice dated 13.7.2005 in Annexure -2 issued by opposite party No.3 inviting applications for settlement of country liquor shop through lottery for the year 2005 -2006 under Gopalpur charge in places such as Bikrampur, Hatipada, Majhigaon, Kusumi and Tata Colony.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is that an Excise Policy for the year 2005 -2006 was made by the Excise Department of State Government for different districts including the district of Ganjam. Under the said Excise Policy, licence in respect of Out Still (O.S.) and Country Spirit (C.S.) shops are required to be renewed every year subject to fulfilment of the conditions contained in the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter called "the Act") and the Orissa Excise Exclusive Privilege Rules, 1970 (hereinafter called "the Rules"). On 30th of May, 2005, the Excise Commissioner was intimated that a decision has been taken by the State Government to introduce the Out Still (O.S.) System in Ganjam, Gajapati and Dhenkanal districts in place of Country Spirit (C.S.). The allegations of the petitioners are that the Collector, Ganjam (opposite party No.3) has invited applications for settlement of exclusive privilege without following the procedure laid down under the Act as well as the Rules. The specific stand taken by the petitioners is that public notice as required under Section 22 of the Act had not been issued and petitioner No.6 who is the Sarpanch of Kolithigaon Gram Panchayat had objected to the proposal initiated by the State Government, but such objection was not considered. Earlier in the year 2002 -2003, a similar attempt was made and the same was challenged by the local public before this Court in O.J.C. No.4503 of 2002 and this Court admitted the writ application and passed interim orders, as a result of which such shops could not be opened. In view of the operation of the interim order, no attempt was made in the year 2003 -2004, but again in the current year an attempt has been made to open the O.S. shops in the same village. In the writ application, Annexure -2 has also been challenged on the ground that it violates Section 26 -A of the Act, but at the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that the proposed area not being a schedule area, Section 26 -A of the Act has no application.

(3.) TWO intervenors, namely, J. Purusottam Reddy and Bhimsen Sahu, have filed a separate counter -affidavit. It is stated in paragraph 6 of the counter -affidavit of the aforesaid intervenors that they have deposited Rs.12,00,000/ - (Twelve lakhs) towards three months licence fee and have become successful in the lottery held pursuant to Annexure -2 on 11.8.2005. It is also stated in the counter -affidavit of the aforesaid intervenors that five lease agreements with five different land -owners have already been executed for necessary construction to be undertaken for distillation and storage of Mahua flower as well as rooms for the staffs. Necessary accessories for manufacture of O.S. liquor have also been purchased. According to the said intervenors, they have already invested about Rs.40,00,000/ - (Forty lakhs) for the above purpose.