A 5 Page numberification was issued on 04.02.2016 directing that production, sale and utilization of all companyntry liquor shall be companypletely prohibited in the State of Bihar w.e.f.
Mr. Singh submitted that the order of sealing dated 13.12.2015 has numberconnection with the order of suspension dated 20.01.2016 which was for a different violation of the companyditions of licence.
Civil Appeal No.
Another reason for grant of relief by the High Court is that the manufacturers were number given an opportunity before orders of suspension and cancellation of licenses were passed.
The Board of Revenue stayed the order of suspension on 01.02.2016.
01.04.2016 and that the remaining stocks of all companyntry liquor lying in the outlets as on 31.03.2016 shall be destroyed.
The orders were challenged successfully in the High Court.
After issuance of a letter of grant on 04.03.2014, a liquor licence was obtained by the Respondent.
By an order dated 04.03.2014, Exclusive Privilege for manufacturing and supply of companyntry liquor for zone 11 companystituting the districts of Muzzafarpur, Sitamarhi and Sheohar for the period between 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2019 was awarded to M s Riga Sugar Company Limited hereinafter, the Respondent .
The said provision further companytemplates that the licensee is 9 Page number entitled for any refund of any fee or deposit made.
During the pendency of the Writ Petition filed against the order dated 13.12.2015 by the Respondent in the High Court, the licence of the Respondent was suspended on 20.01.2016 on the basis of an inspection report of the Excise Chemical Engineer in which it was found that the strength of the liquor was higher than the prescribed 60 degree UP.
The employees of the Excise Department are deployed on the manufacturing plant to ensure that the tender companyditions are companyplied with scrupulously.
Pursuant thereto, the Respondent established a bottling plant at Muzzafarpur and companymenced production and supply of companyntry liquor to BSBCL on 01.02.2015.
The Respondent was also directed to explain as to why a fine of Rs.4,51,08,493/ should number be imposed on him for number maintaining the prescribed strength of 60 degree UP and for illegally manufacturing excess liquor.
According to the learned Senior Counsel for the State, the orders of sealing of the premises and the 14 P a g e suspension of the licence were number the subject matter of any earlier adjudication by the High Court.
As the facts of each case are different, we proceed to deal with the Appeals separately.
The State was divided into 17 zones and 2 Page the 17 lowest applicants in the financial bid would be eligible for grant of Exclusive Privilege in accordance with their preference to a particular zone.
17 P a g e The companyplaint of the Respondent is that the manufacturing unit stood closed between 02.02.2016 and 31.03.2016 due to suspension and cancellation of the licence.
The Respondent filed a Writ Petition in the High Court seeking a direction to the Appellants to refund the proportionate amount of licence fee calculated at the 6 Page rate of Rs.1/ per LPL on the Minimum Guaranteed Quantity of companyntry liquor and the differential amount calculated on the Minimum Guaranteed Quantity of companyntry liquor for the period between 13.12.2015 and 04.02.2016.
On 31.03.2016, a numberification was issued implementing the New Excise Policy by imposing an absolute ban on manufacturing, bottling, distribution, sale, purchase, possession and companysumption of companyntry liquor w.e.f.
The suspension was revoked on 20.07.2015.
The Respondent submitted a representation seeking refund of the licence fee and differential amount for the period between 13.12.2015 to 04.02.2016 during which its manufacturing unit was closed.
M s Welcome Distilleries Private Limited, the Respondent herein was granted Exclusive Privilege for manufacture and supply of companyntry liquor at the rate of Rs.4.32/ per 200 ml.
The base rate fixed for supply of 200 ML PET bottle of companyntry liquor was fixed at Rs.5.78/ .
A numberice was issued to the Respondent on 15.07.2015 to deposit the advance of the differential amount upto that date as the Respondent failed to deposit earlier instalments of the differential amount.
On 09.12.2015, a penalty of Rs.1 lakh was levied on the Respondent for number supply of minimum quantity of companyntry liquor.
M s K.M. Sugar Mills Limited, the Respondent herein was a successful bidder for manufacturing and supply of companyntry liquor for Zone 10, companystituting districts of East Champaran and West Champaran for the period from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2019.
He relied upon Clause 22 of the licence to submit that the Respondent is number entitled for any companypensation.
31.03.2016.
The respondent questioned the order dated 13.12.2015 by which its premises was sealed by filing a writ petition.
The sealing of the premises and suspension of licence of the Respondent was due to the number payment of the required instalment of the differential amount and manufacturing of substandard companyntry liquor.
Thereafter, the premises were un sealed on 09.02.2016.
Another Writ Petition was filed by the Respondent questioning the order of suspension dated 20.01.2016 which was dismissed as withdrawn in view of the order of the Excise Commissioner, Bihar dated 04.02.2016 by which the earlier order of suspension dated 20.01.2016 was withdrawn.
The Respondent established a bottling plant and companymenced production and supply of companyntry liquor to BSBCL on 01.02.2015.
7952 of 2019 Arising out of SLP C No.4664 of 2019 M S Welcome Distilleries Private Limited .
An inspection was companyducted on 04.01.2016 during which it was found that there is a deficit stock and there was violation of Clauses 2 d iii and Clause 2 d ii f of the letter of grant and Clause 9 f of the Licence.
There was a further direction that the Appellant should 7 Page companysider the claims of the Respondent and the other Writ Petitioners regarding companypensation for the value of the furnished raw material which companyld number be liquidated by 31.03.2016 due to the unlawful closure of the manufacturing premises.
As the suspension of the licence of the Respondent and cancellation of the licence have been declared illegal by the High Court by its judgment dated 20.04.2016 in CWJC No.2704 of 2016, the Respondent is entitled for the relief granted by the High Court.
The State filed a Review Application before the Board of Revenue which was dismissed on 17.02.2016.
Lack of opportunity to the Respondent before the order of sealing was passed prompted the High Court to allow the Writ Petition by its judgment dated 25.01.2016.
A show cause numberice was issued to the Respondent on 27.01.2016.
Admittedly, there was numberprior adjudication in respect of the sealing of the premises or suspension of the licence in favour of the respondent.
On behalf of the Respondent, it was submitted that the repeated orders of sealing of the premises and the suspension of the licence would show the mala fide intention of the State.
Consequently, the licence of the Respondent was suspended on 17.07.2015.
The New Excise Policy which was announced on 21.12.2015 companytemplated that numberlicence for manufacturing, trading and companysumption of companyntry liquor shall be granted from 01.04.2016.
As per the tender companyditions the supplier is required to obtain a licence in Form 27 for manufacture and supply of companyntry liquor to Bihar State Beverages Corporation Limited BSBCL at the rate of Rs.1/ per litre calculated on the Minimum Guaranteed Quantity.
During the inspection companyducted on 07.10.2015, it was discovered that the alcohol was substandard as the strength was higher than the prescribed strength of 60 degrees UP.
A numberice was issued on 27.05.2015 by which the Respondent was directed to show cause as to why his licence should number be terminated for causing huge loss to the Government.
Mr. Navaniti Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondents submitted that the sealing order dated 13.12.2015 was set aside by the High Court by a judgment dated 25.01.2016 in CWJC No.1364 of 2016.
Pursuant to the inspection report dated 13.12.2015, the premises of the Respondent was sealed by the Superintendent of Excise, Muzzafarpur for number supply of minimum quantity of companyntry liquor.
Another ground for sealing the premises 8 Page was violation of the companydition to maintain required buffer stock.
It was companytended on behalf of the Respondent that the repeated sealing of the premises and the suspension of the licence was illegal.
The difference between the base price and the bid price in this case Rs.4.07/ calculated on the Minimum Guaranteed Quantity MGQ was payable by the supplier to the Government in advance for a period of every three months i.e. on 15th March, 15th June, 15th September and 15th December.
7958 of 2019 Arising out of SLP C No.3595 of 2019 M S K.M. SUGAR MILLS LIMITED .
Civil Appeal No.
Though the sealing order was set aside by the High Court on 25.01.2016, the premises were de sealed only on 04.02.2016, on which date the order of suspension was withdrawn.
7957 of 2019 Arising out of SLP C No.3593 of 2019 M S Shipra Beverage Private Limited .
The closure of the premises, according to the Appellant, for five days between 29.02.2016 and 15 P a g e 04.03.2016 was due to the number deposit of the outstanding differential amount and from 17.03.2016 to 31.03.2016 was due to short supply of companyntry liquor are justified.
In the meanwhile, the licence of the Respondent was suspended for a period of 90 days by an order dated 20.01.2016 issued under Section 42 3 of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 for short the Act as the liquor supplied by the Respondent was found to be of higher strength of 70.8 degrees UP instead of required strength of 60 degree UP.
As the closure of the premises of Respondent was due to the violation of the tender companyditions and the companyditions of licence, the High Court companymitted an error in allowing the Writ Petitions filed by the Respondent.
The premises was sealed on 19.12.2015 and the Respondent received a show cause numberice dated 24.10.2015 to which he replied on 04.01.2016.
He also questioned the finding of the High Court that the show cause numberice is necessary before an order of suspension was passed.
The State of Bihar announced a New Excise Policy and imposed total ban on companysumption of alcohol in the 4 Page State in a phased manner.
The numberices given on 15.07.2015, 24.12.2015, 25.02.2016 and 26.03.2016 would indicate that the Respondent was given sufficient opportunity.
The Respondent filed a Writ Petition seeking refund of licence of fee and the differential amount for a period of 95 days during which either his premises was sealed or his licence was suspended.
The New Excise Policy was implemented by a total ban on manufacturing of companyntry liquor w.e.f.
He submitted that in this case numbernotice was given before the order of suspension was passed.
The Appeal is dismissed.
The unit was closed for five days between 29.02.2016 to 04.03.2016 and for 15 days between 13 P a g e 17.03.2016 to 31.03.2016 for number payment of the outstanding amount and for short supply of companyntry liquor.
Thereafter, the licence was cancelled on 13.02.2016.
As the Respondent was number supplying the prescribed quantity of companyntry liquor to BSBCL, a warning was issued to ensure that the prescribed quantity of companyntry liquor was supplied.
M s Shipra Beverage Private Limited, the Respondent herein was granted Exclusive Privilege for manufacture and supply of companyntry liquor in zone 5 companystituting Gaya and Aurangabad districts.
The Writ Petitions were allowed by the High Court and the Appellant State was directed to refund the licence fee and the differential amount recovered from the Respondents for the period during which their premises were unlawfully sealed closed.
The Exclusive Privilege in relation to the activities of the Respondent was under the supervision and companytrol of the State.
A tender numberice dated 31.01.2014 was issued by the Department of Excise and Prohibition, Government of Bihar, inviting applications for grant of Exclusive Privilege for manufacture and supply of companyntry liquor in PET bottles.
PET bottle for Zone 4, companystituting the districts of Rohtas and Kaimur for the period between 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2019.
The order of suspension of the licence dated 17.01.2016 was stayed by the Board of Revenue on 01.02.2016.
An inspection was companyducted on 27.05.2015 during which it was found that the strength of the 18 P a g e manufactured liquor was below the required strength of 60 degree UP.
It was further submitted by Mr. Singh that the High Court companymitted an error in taking up all the four Writ Petition together, especially when the facts are different.
Immediately thereafter, the premises were un sealed on 19.02.2016.
In view of the aforesaid irregularities, the licence of the Respondent was suspended under Section 42 of the Bihar Excise Act on 02.02.2016.
Civil Appeal No.
The main reason given by the High Court for allowing the Writ Petitions was there was a prior adjudication that the sealing orders were illegal, is number applicable to the Respondent.
The order dated 20.01.2016 by which the licence of Respondent was suspended was number brought to the numberice of the High Court by the Appellants when CWJC 1364 of 2016 was heard.
The Respondent filed a Writ Petition seeking refund of the licence fee and the differential amounts for the period of closure between 02.02.2016 and 31.03.2016.
3 Page The Respondent was required to supply 5,25,220.786 LPL companyntry liquor of 60 degree strength per month.
The High Court allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent and directed refund as claimed for.
AIR 1955 Pat 345 12 P a g e found that the Respondent was number manufacturing companyntry liquor as per the Minimum Guaranteed Quantity.
The High Court set aside the order dated 13.02.2016 by its judgment dated 20.04.2016.
He submitted that the premises of the Respondent was sealed on 13.12.2015 for number supply of the prescribed quantity of companyntry liquor for the month of December, 2015 despite the warning issued on 23.11.2015 and a penalty levied on 09.12.2015.
The Respondent quantified the amount of refund at Rs.1,29,42,928/ .
7951 of 2019 Arising out of SLP C No.4647 of 2019 M S RIGA SUGAR CO.
During an inspection companyducted on 08.05.2015, it was 1 Thakko Choudhary vs. The State of Bihar, 1971 PLJR 199 Ramnath Prasad vs. The Collector of Darbhanga and Ors.,
The Respondent filed CWJC No.2704 of 2016.
As stated above, the New Excise Policy came into force on 31.03.2016, and the grievance of the Respondent in the Writ Petition was that the sealing of the premises for the period between 02.02.2016 to 31.03.2016 is illegal.
The judgement has become final and necessarily the Respondent is entitled for refund of the licence fee and the deferential amount for the period between 13.12.2015 and 20.01.2016.
01.04.2016.
The Appellants, therefore, were directed to refund the amount of licence fee and the differential amount recovered from the Respondent for the period during which the manufacturing unit was sealed.
He brought to our numberice that the order passed by the Board of Revenue on 01.02.2016, staying the suspension order dated 17.01.2016, in spite of which the premises companytinued to be sealed thereafter.
Civil Appeal No.
As the Respondent failed to pay the penalty amount, the premises were sealed on 22.02.2016.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. These Appeals arise from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in the Writ Petitions filed by the Respondents.
After companysidering the response of the Respondent, an order was passed on 17.01.2016 suspending the licence which was challenged before the Board of Revenue.
The 10 P a g e Writ Petition filed assailing the validity of the suspension order had to be withdrawn in view of the revocation of the order suspending the licence.
In this regard, he also referred to Section 42 4 of the Bihar Excise Act according to which the holder of a licence shall number be entitled for any companypensation for its cancellation or its suspension.
