DEVENDRA GEHLOT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue notice to the respondents.

(2.) Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, the learned Additional Advocate General, appears for the respondents and has filed a reply in this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after obtaining a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the concerned Excise Officer, the petitioner himself submitted the online application and received sanction for the location from Kailana Chouraha to Akhaliya Chouraha for Shop No. 7, Shop Code No. 1903021. It is further submitted that subsequently, on 17/4/2025, a notice was issued by the District Excise Officer, Jodhpur, stating that the online approval was based on a self- declaration, and due to a change in the jurisdictional circle, the sanction was erroneously issued. Therefore, the petitioner contends that the sanction should not be revoked. The petitioner also asserts that the facts regarding the sanction by the Excise Officer, including photographs taken prior to the approval, were duly notified. Additionally, the petitioner claims that as of 12/5/2025, the committee had not finalized the issue concerning the correctness of the location, as evident from Annexure-11 issued by the District Excise Officer, Jodhpur. The petitioner argues that despite this, the location was canceled through an unreasoned order, relying on Rule 75 of the Excise Rules, which grants discretion to the District Excise Officer to shift the location and not for cancellation. The petitioner was given only three days to submit a fresh site. The impugned order itself grants the petitioner the liberty to file an appeal under Sec. 9(a) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1975, before the Excise Commissioner, Udaipur.