M/S SOMRASS TRADERS THROUGH ITS PARTNER S. GURINDER SINGH GILL, LUDHIANA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ petitions raise similar questions and are, therefore, disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) In Civil Writ Petition No. 102 of 2017, petitioners No.1 and 2 are the same. They have unnecessarily been impleaded as petitioners No.1 and 2 on account of their having been issued licences for different zones, namely, Zone Nos.25 and 28, respectively. The petitioners seek a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund/adjust the license fee and other fees as prescribed for the month of April, 2016 in the Excise Policy for the year 2016-17 on account of liquor not having been supplied during this period. In Civil Writ Petition No.25449 of 2016, the petitioners seek the same reliefs and also a refund/adjustment for the period from 27.09.2016 to 31.10.2016. The petitioners in both the petitions also seek a writ of certiorari to quash clauses 26, 27 and 36 of the Excise Policy for the year 2016-17. The third writ petitioner claims similar reliefs.

(3.) For convenience, we will refer to the facts from Civil Writ Petition No. 102 of 2017.