GUPTA MODERN BREWERIES Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LETTER of demand issued by respondent No 3 under his No. 3C49 -50/CRJ dated December, 6, 1989 directing the payment of Rs. 2.22, 303.50 on account of staff charges for the period prescribed therein have been challenged in this petition mainly on the ground of the order being without jurisdiction and the authority of law. It is further prayed that the respondents be re -strained from demanding or recovering the aforesaid amount or any other amount towards staff charges of the excise staff posted on duty at the petitioners distillery. The Distillery Rules framed under section 11, 20 and 25 of the Excise Act are alleged to have transgressed the limits imposed upon the rules making power of the Govt. Rule 17 of the Distillery Rules is alleged to be unconstitutional having no rational or nexus in the exercise of the powers vested in the authorities under the Excise Act. It is submitted that the posting of any staff of Excise Department or any other staff of the Government within the premises of the Distillery of a Licence is a unilateral on in as much as is not at the demand or request or even requirement of a licencee but purely as a measure of administrative convenience for the Government, for which a Licencee cannot be burdened. It is alleged that the determination of the amount specified in the notice of demand is unilateral as having been determined without notice to the petitioner.

(2.) IN the objections filed on behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the Jammu and Kashmir Excise Act read with Jammu and Kashmir Liquor and Intoxication Drugs Ware -housing Rules, 1970 and J&K Distillery Rules prescribe the restriction and conditions for the Licence to be granted under the said Act. The petitioner has been granted Distillery Licence in accordance with restriction and Conditions as laid down in the J&K Excise Act and the Rules framed thereunder Section 16 of the Excise Act empowers the Government to levy a duty on all liquors and intoxicating drugs manufactured in the territories of the State or imported into the State as the Government may from time to time prescribe in accordance with the provisions of sections 17, 18 and 19 of Excise Act. The demand made for the staff charges is stated to be for the period commencing from Jan. 1982 till Sept. 1989.It submitted that the Government in lieu and consideration of parting with the exclusive rights and privileges conferred upon them under the Excise Act can claim such charges which the petitioner cannot challenge. No fundamental or legal right of the petitioner is alleged to have been violated and the charges have been claimed strictly according to the provisions of law applicable in the case.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.