Conditional excise licence could not survive revival of earlier licence after revisional relief restored the original settlement.

A conditional excise licence granted to the petitioner under an advertisement could not survive once the revisional authority set aside cancellation of the earlier licensee's licence under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910. The settlement was expressly made subject to pending writ or appeal proceedings, and the petitioner took the grant with notice of that contingency. When the cancellation was overturned, the original licence revived by operation of law, leaving no enforceable right in favour of the petitioner to continue the later licence for the same shop. The writ petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner could challenge the revisional order setting aside cancellation of the original licensee's excise licence and, in consequence, continue to claim an enforceable right over the subsequently granted licence for the same shop.

Analysis: The licence granted to the petitioner arose out of an advertisement which expressly made the settlement subject to the outcome of pending writ or appeal proceedings concerning the cancellation of the earlier licensee's licence. The original licensee had successfully pursued the statutory remedies under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, and the revisional authority set aside the cancellation order. Once the cancellation was set aside, the original licence revived by operation of law, and the later grant in favour of the petitioner was only a conditional arrangement that could not survive the restoration of the earlier licence. The petitioner was not a party to the revision and had entered the arrangement with notice of the pending dispute and the contingent nature of the grant.

Conclusion: The petitioner had no enforceable right to continue the licence, and the writ petition was dismissed.

---