Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10035 (UTT)

PREM SINGH v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/2182/2023 · 2025-09-11

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:8099 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS 2182/2023 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Ganesh Dutt Kandpal, Deputy AG, for the State. (2) Petitioner was granted licence to run a Indian made foreign liquor shop at Shaharfatak in District Almora. Collector, Almora passed an order on 20.7.2021 asking the petitioner to deposit the amount of loss suffered by the State Government in re-auctioning the licence. Petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order, passed by Collector under Section 11(1) of the Excise Act, before the appellate authority i.e. Commissioner, Excise Department. While preferring the appeal, petitioner also filed an application seeking relaxation of condition of pre-deposit of 25 per cent of the disputed amount. Petitioner’s application for exemption was rejected by Excise Commissioner vide order dated 25.7.2023. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 25.7.2023. (3) After arguing for a while, learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly concedes that since petitioner has remedy of revision before the State Government, therefore, writ petition may be disposed of by permitting the petitioner to approach the revisional authority. He submits that writ petition was filed in 2023, as, at that time, the same officer was holding charge of Excise Commissioner as well as Secretary, Excise. He submits that the benefit of time 2025:UHC:8099 spent in pursuing the remedy before this Court may be given to petitioner as per provision of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. (4) Learned State Counsel submits that he has no objection if writ petition is disposed of in terms of the prayer made by learned Counsel for the petitioner. (5) Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to petitioner to file revision before the State Government within ten days from today. Petitioner shall be at liberty to seek benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act, as regards time spent by him in pursuing the remedy before this Court. (6) For a period of ten days, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by Collector on 20.7.2021. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 11.9.2025 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab1 98d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6 FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2025.09.20 12:18:18 +05'30' 2025:UHC:8099