TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (8) TMI 706
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....end India made foreign liquor, hereinafter referred to 'IMFL' for the district of Begusarai. One Prem Lal Gupta challenged the same by filing a writ application before this Court. During the pendency of the said writ application, petitioner was granted the licence. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Prem Lata Gupta v. The State of Bihar and Ors. 2002 (3) PLJR 769, allowed the writ application and quashed the grant of additional licence to vend IMFL at Begusarai. As regards the validity of the grant of licence to the petitioner, this Court observed as follows : 24.-xxx As we are not approving the recommendations dated 13.2.2002 and are wishing to quash the orders passed by the commissioner, Excise and the Board of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to time. In these circumstances, there is no justification for the argument that the period for for which the licence was issued to the appellant has run out and the appeal has become infructuous. Said appeal was disposed of by the Supreme Court on 8th of September, 2003. Petitioner, thereafter, filed application for renewal of the licence on 13.10.2003. After the lapse of more than a year, the Collector issued notice dated 3.12.2004 (Annexure-4) asking the petitioner to show cause as to why; renewal be not refused. Petitioner submitted his reply and on consideration of the same, the Collector by order dated 3.3.2005 (Annexure-5), declined to renew the licence. Renewal was refused on three fold grounds, i.e.- (i) The petitioner is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gly his application for intervention is allowed. Mr. Satyabir Bharti, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, raises a very short point. He submits that the Collector had declined to renew the licence only on the ground that the licence granted to the petitioner in the year 2002-2003 is illegal and not in accordance with law. He submits that the Collector cannot go into this question at the time when he, is exercising the power of renewal. Mr. R.K. Datta, S.C. IV, however appearing on behalf of the State, submits that licencee has no right of renewal of the licence and renewal cannot be claimed as a matter of right. As such no fault can be found out in the impugned order. In this connection, Mr. Datta has drawn our atte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ggrieved person to challenge the same. The Supreme Court in the case of the petitioner i.e. Shiv Kumar Bhagat (supra) has observed that "there is no justification for the argument that the period for which licence was issued had ran out." In any view of the matter if challenge is not made to the grant of licence for whatever reason, same shall not mean that the licence granted to the petitioner has become illegal and the licensing authority while considering the question of renewal can go into this question. We are of the opinion that the facts occurring subsequent to the grant of the licence and before the renewal, shall only be relevant for deciding the question of renewal and the authority while considering the question of renewal can....