Excise policy challenge to new liquor shop failed where no rule breach, no quota cut, and allottee was not impleaded.

A challenge to the creation and allotment of a new country liquor shop was rejected because the allottee was not impleaded and the petition failed on the merits. The Court accepted that the District Magistrate proposed new shops after vacant shops remained unsettled, the Excise Commissioner approved the proposal, and the shop was created under the prevailing excise arrangement. It also found that the new shop was about 3.5 km away, the petitioner's quota was not reduced, and no violation of the excise rules or policy governing the number and location of shops was shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether the creation and allotment of a new country liquor shop in the locality was liable to be quashed on the ground that it adversely affected the petitioner's existing licence and offended the governing excise policy and rules.

Analysis: The petitioner's challenge to the new shop failed both on facts and on law. The petitioner had not impleaded the allottee of the shop, which was treated as a serious defect. On the merits, the counter affidavit showed that the District Magistrate proposed creation of new shops after vacant shops remained unsettled, the Excise Commissioner approved the proposal, and the new shop at Hadhai was created in accordance with the prevailing excise arrangement. The Court accepted that the new shop was about 3.5 km away, that the petitioner's own quota was not curtailed, and that there was no violation of the applicable excise rules or of the policy governing the number and situation of shops.

Conclusion: The challenge to the allotment of the new country liquor shop was rejected and the writ petition failed on merits.

---