SRI JAGANNATH DAS Vs. PRADYUMNA KUMAR DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge has been made to the illegal and arbitrary action of the opposite parties 1 and 5 in imposing/demanding the license fees irrespective of the fact that license fees has been deposited as per required norms.

(2.) The unshorn details of the facts of the case are that the petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act with an object to establish grain based distilleries in Odisha. It is further stated that such company has established a grain based distilleries of 30 KLPD capacity at village Barapada in the district of Cuttack. The petitioner prepared the detailed project report seeking finance from the bank and have procured license from the concerned authorities wherein the petitioner has made a project cost arrived at Rs.76.25 crores. The petitioner under the provisions of Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, (in short called 'the Act'), applied before the opposite party no.1 for grant of license in favour of the petitioner-company for bottling of IMFL and to start commercial production for remaining period of 2012-13 on 6.3.2013. It is also stated in the application that they have planned to produce 12000 cases per month and the exact production capacity would be assessed after the commercial production. The opposite party no.1, under the provision of the Act, granted license vide license registration No.1/2013-14 in the name of the said petitioner-company for the period from 6.6.2013 to 31.3.2014 for wholesale blend of foreign liquor and for bottling such liquor only at the premises of the petitioner. It is also stated that the authorities have categorically made condition that the licensee shall pay in advance the Government fees of Rs.12,66,301/- for the year 2013-14 for the period from 23.5.2013 to 31.3.2014 and it was vide Challan No.320 dated 31.5.2013 after which it was authorized to carry the operation of the compounding and blending only at the premises of petitioner.

(3.) It is stated that the opposite party no.2, Excise Commissioner, sent a letter to the Collector, Cuttack informing that the petitioner-company has been granted license for compounding and blending of IMFL at Village-Barapada whereunder the petitionercompany has deposited license fees per annum but as per Memo No.860 dated 27.6.2013, the Collector, Cuttack issued letter dated 18.7.2013 to the opposite party no.5 asking for a clarification about license fees from the Excise Commissioner. The Excise Commissioner asked the Collector, Cuttack to inform the petitioner to deposit license fees of Rs.75,00,000.00 per annum instead of Rs.15,00,000.00 per annum and the petitioner should produce the certificate from the District Industries Centre. In the meantime, the Collector, Cuttack asked the petitioner to deposit Rs.51,45,206.00, i.e., rest of the amount towards grant of license for bottling (compounding and blending) in favour of the petitioner-company. When the petitioner approached the General Manager, District Industries Centre to certify the production of the petitioner-company, the District Industries Centre made inquiry and found that the tentative capacity of production would be 10200 cases per month. Accordingly, the General Manager, District Industries Centre requested the Director of Industries to certify the tentative production capacity of the bottling plant of the proposed beverage enterprise of the petitioner-company. This tentative production capacity of the bottling plant of the proposed beverage enterprise of the petitioner has been annexed to the writ petition. Since the petitioner-company is a large scale enterprise, the Director of Industries is to certify the tentative production capacity of the bottling plant of the petitioner. Along with such letter of the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Cuttack, representation was made by the petitioner-company to the Collector, Cuttack, opposite party no.1 stating that in view of the production of the capacity of 10000 cases per month, the license fees has been deposited to the tune of RS.12,86,301/- for remaining period of 2013-14 and accordingly the petitioner requested that the opposite party no.1 to waive out the differential amount of Rs.51,45,206.00.