Excise auction bids are provisional until sanction; courts will not override revenue-based rejection absent mala fides.

In auctions for excise privilege, the highest bid is only provisional until final sanction by the competent authority, and the bidder acquires no vested right before approval. Adequacy of price and protection of revenue are executive matters, so the court will not substitute its own assessment for that of the authority in the absence of mala fides or manifest arbitrariness. The High Court was therefore not justified in quashing the Excise Commissioner's disapproval of the bids or directing acceptance of the respondents' bid, and the order for re-auction was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the Excise Commissioner's order disapproving the auction bids for excise shops and in directing acceptance of the respondents' bid.

Analysis: The statutory scheme placed the power to grant the exclusive privilege of selling liquor in the State Government and the Excise Commissioner, and the bid accepted by the auctioning officer remained only provisional until sanctioned by the Excise Commissioner, subject to appeal or revision. The excise rules and manual treated the highest bid as only a guideline; they did not confer any vested right on the bidder. Adequacy of price and protection of revenue were matters for executive assessment, and the Court would not substitute its own view merely because another formula for comparison of bids was possible. In the absence of mala fides, the Commissioner's assessment that the bids were inadequate could not be branded arbitrary or irrelevant, and the High Court ought not to have exercised writ jurisdiction to overturn that decision or compel acceptance of the bid.

Conclusion: The High Court was not justified in interfering, and the Commissioner's order rejecting the bids and directing re-auction was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: In matters of grant of excise privilege by auction, adequacy of the bid and protection of revenue are executive functions; a bidder acquires no vested right until final sanction, and judicial review under Article 226 will not substitute the court's assessment for that of the competent authority absent mala fides or manifest arbitrariness.

---