Excise licence applications are governed by the rules in force at consideration, not original filing date.

An excise licence application is ordinarily governed by the rules in force when it is considered, not when it was first filed. An application made in 1992 but taken up much later was therefore assessed under the West Bengal Excise Rules, 2003 as amended in 2004, rather than the 1993 Rules. Under the amended regime, new site licences were subject to a 1000-feet prohibited distance from educational and religious institutions, and the premises fell within that restriction. A circular relied upon by the applicant applied only to applications pending under the 2003 regime before the 2004 amendment and did not assist an old, revived application.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant's pending application for a foreign liquor bar and restaurant licence had to be considered under the West Bengal Excise Rules, 1993 or under the West Bengal Excise (Selection of New Sites and Grant of License for Retail Sale of Liquor and Certain Other Intoxicants) Rules, 2003 as amended in 2004, and whether the licence could be renewed despite the premises being within the prohibited distance from educational and religious institutions.

Analysis: The application made in 1992 was not processed for years, and the material consideration arose only when the request was taken up later. The governing principle applied was that licence applications are ordinarily to be examined under the rules in force when the application is considered, not when it was originally filed. The 2003 Rules, as amended in 2004, prescribed a defined prohibited distance of 1000 feet for new sites, and the appellant's premises was within that distance from several religious places and a school. The circular relied upon by the appellant was confined to applications made under the 2003 regime before the 2004 amendment and did not assist an application originating in 1992 and revived much later. The earlier application was also found not to be a proper application in the relevant sense.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to have the licence considered under the 1993 Rules, and the refusal to renew the licence under the amended 2003 Rules was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the non-renewal failed because the applicable regulatory regime was the one in force when the matter was considered, and the premises fell within the prohibited distance under that regime.

Ratio Decidendi: An application for excise licence is to be governed by the rules in force on the date of consideration, and a licence for a new site cannot be granted where the premises fall within the statutorily prescribed prohibited distance from educational or religious institutions.

---