0

When already an appeal was pending to be decided the court abstained from venturing into the matter: High Court of Uttarakhand.

Since there was already an appeal pending, it abstained from venturing into that prospective and the legal implications of the Recovery Citation, because the appeal was a pending consideration, which will have implications on the Recovery Citation, and hence would be one of the factors which have to be considered by the Appellate Authority. A single Judge bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma in the matter of Amit Goyal Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others (Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1583 of 2021), dealt with an issue where the petitioner had earlier approached the High Court by filing a writ petition being “Amit Goyal Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others”, as against the order of, canceling his license for running the liquor shop situated at Kashipur Road, District Udham Singh Nagar, which was awarded to him in accordance with the Policy of the 22.02.2020.

In the present case, such writ was dismissed stating it was premature and simultaneously observing that as against the order of the cancellation of the license. It was stated that the petitioner had a remedy of preferring an appeal, under Section 11 of the Excise Act. The petitioner had also preferred a writ petition, seeking a refund of the minimum monthly guarantee duty for the period of ten days, which was pending before this court. The present petition was to seek relief in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned recovery citation passed by respondent no. 6. Also, to seek a direction against respondents to stay the proceeding of recovery citation passed by respondent no.6. Moreover, to get a direction from the court the respondent no.3/Excise Commissioner to decide the application filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, for seeking relaxation of the condition regarding deposit of the twenty-five percent of the outstanding amount, as expeditiously as possible within time bound period as this court would find fit.

The court observed that since there was already an appeal pending, it abstained from venturing into that prospective and the legal implications of the Recovery Citation, because the appeal was a pending consideration, which will have implications on the Recovery Citation, and hence would be one of the factors which have to be considered by the Appellate Authority.

Thereby the wit petition was disposed of. However, the excise commissioner was directed to deal with the pending matter expeditiously within a month from the day.

Click Here For The Judgement

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat