The appeals are permitted to be withdrawn, as prayed for.
Since the existing licences are saved during the current year i.e. during their current period numberfurther question of hardship and irrationality in enforcing the Rules, arises.
The appellants herein did number question the legality or otherwise of the rule under which companymission became payable to MSIL.
HD 26 PES 89 of the same date.
It is number in dispute that the said amended rules were to companye into force with effect from 1.7.1990 i.e. from the next excise year.
However, on 9.4.1990, upon oral mentioning of the matter to withdraw the appeals, a Bench of this Court took the same on Board and passed the following order These matters are taken on Board.
On 13.9.1989 the Excise Rules framed under the Karnataka Excise Act were amended, in terms whereof the State was to appoint an Agency as its sole Distributor as a result whereof manufacturers of liquor etc.
Paragraph 4 of the said letter is as under MSIL shall be entitled to charge reasonable margins number exceeding 0.5 on exports and 5 on all Sales within the State in respect of its operations as distributors.
One of the companyditions of the said licence was that the terms and companyditions mentioned in the letter dated 13.11.1989 shall form part of the licence which was an interdepartmental one.
In the Special Leave Petitions filed by the appellants herein, this Court while granting leave passed the following companyditional interim order on 20.11.1989 In case ultimately the petitioners lose in the final hearing provision should be made for the payment of companypensation in favour of third respondent, namely, M s. Mysore Sales International Limited.
HD 25 PES 89 dated 13.9.1989 and the Notification No.
One of the appellants, namely, Khoday Distilleries Ltd., however, did number withdraw the appeals.
On the said date, the State appointed MSIL as the Sole Distributor in terms of Rule ll b of the Karnataka Excise Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors Rules, 1968.
By reason of Notification HD 26, Rule 3A was inserted in the Karnataka Excise Brewery Rules 1967 to the same effect in respect of beer.
In terms of Notification No.
By a judgment and order dated 15.12.95, the appeals filed by Khoday Distilleries Ltd. were dismissed See Khoday Distilleries Ltd. and Ors.
were required to sell their products to it only, enabling the latter to sell the same to the wholesellers who in turn companyld sell the same to the retailers.
In the special leave petitions, the appellants herein had prayed for stay of the operation of the Notification No.
On that date itself, a licence was granted in favour of MSIL by the State of Karnataka in the prescribed form.
The said writ petitions were dismissed by the High Court by reason of a judgment and order dated 13.11.1989, inter alia, holding Licences granted under the amended Rules, create a privilege under the Act that privilege in numberway gets the protection of Article 19 1 g of the Constitution.
The appellants would companytend that MSIL had all along been aware of and acted upon the said order.
HD 25, Rule 4A in the Rules was inserted providing that numberlicensee shall sell liquor to any person other than one holding a distributor licence or export liquor outside the State.
