DINESH MEWARA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner, a licensee for country liquor retail shop at Ward No.6 Sojat City seeks to challenge the notification dated 09.05.2006 issued by the District Excise Officer, Pali inviting offers for the purpose of transferring country liquor group of Ward No.10 of Takhatgarh Municipality to Sojat Municipality.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the Government proceeded to establish ward-wise liquor shops in various areas of Pali District for the excise settlement year 2006-2007. In the area of Sojat Municipality, the shops were established in its Ward Nos.4,6,14 and 18. The petitioner was allotted a shop in Ward No.6 in the lottery drawn on 03.03.2006 on an annual amount of Rs.6,75,120/- and the order in that respect was issued on 28.03.2006 (Annex.A/2). The petitioner has also placed on record the orders issued in relation to other licensees for Ward Nos.18, 14 and 4 as Annexures A/3, A/4 and A/5 respectively. According to the petitioner, all the allottees have deposited the required amount and are carrying on their business. On 09.05.2006, the petitioner came across the impugned notification advertised in the newspaper whereby tenders were invited from the persons who wanted to get shifted the shop of Ward No.10 of Takhatgarh Municipality in the area of Sojat Municipality other than the aforesaid Ward Nos.4,6,14 and 18 and the tenders were to be finalised on 12.05.2006.

(3.) The petitioner has assailed this invitation of tenders for getting the shop in Ward No.10 of Takhatgarh shifted to the area of Sojat as wholly without jurisdiction, unconstitutional and contrary to the rules. With the submissions that though he has no fundamental right to deal in business of liquor, yet he has right of equality, the petitioner has urged that the Government having already divided the entire District of Pali ward-wise and the shops having been allotted for the year 2006-2007 and fees thereof having been paid by the respective allottees, the respondent No.2 has arbitrarily invited options to get the shop of Ward No.10 of Takhatgarh transferred to Sojat; and such an action is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has alleged that the Government having fixed the shops in four wards of Sojat, he had obtained allotment and made investments and such transfer would cause prejudice to him. It has been suggested that the Excise Commissioner had earlier issued orders for permitting transfer only with the consent of prior allottees but without calling for any objection from the petitioner, and without any opportunity of hearing, the shop of Takhatgarh is sought to be transferred to Sojat; and that only Sojat has been chosen for such transfer without any basis and such an action is discriminatory too.