Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010072122025 2025:GAU-AS:5501 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1895/2025 SUSHMITA SAIKIA ALIAS SUSHMITA DAS D/O- GOBINDA PRASAD DAS, W/O- ABHIJIT DAS, R/O- GELAPUKHURI ROAD, OPP KOCHUJAN FIELD, TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN- 786125 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP BY THE COMM AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, EXCISE DEPTT, GHY- 781006 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISISONER TINSUKIA TINSUKIA DISTRICT ASSAM 3:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER EXCISE TINSUKIA TINSUKIA ASSAM 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE TINSUKIA TINSUKI A Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BANIK, MS F BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : SC, EXCISE DEPTT., GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 05-05-2025 Heard Mr. S Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. RR Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Excise Department as well as Mr. G Bokalial, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3. 2. The petitioner’s grievance is that despite the respondent authorities having given their approval for shifting of the petitioner’s IMFL Retail “OFF” License No. 60/98 and CS Retail “OFF” License No. 46/2017-18 from its existing location at TMB Ward No. 10, GNB Road, Tinsukia to the new site at Dag No. 158 and PP No. 15, situated at Gellapukhuri Road, Katchujan Gaon, Mouza- Rangagora, Tinsukia, the respondent authorities have not allowed the petitioner to shift, due to alleged objections made by the residents of the area, post the approval granted by the authorities. 3. Mr. RR Gogoi, learned counsel for the Excise Department submits that once approval has been given by the authorities, the authorities should not stop the petitioner from transferring his shop location, from one place to another, within the same district and operate the same. 4. Mr. G Bokalial, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 submits that after approval had been given by the District Commissioner and the Commissioner of Excise for transfer of the “OFF” license of the petitioner, there was some objections raised by some residents of the neighbourhood with the proposed opening of a new “OFF” shop and as such, the shifting had been kept in abeyance by the District Commissioner. Page No.# 3/4 5. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 6. The facts of the case shows that the petitioner had applied for transfer of his wine shop from TMB Ward No. 10, GNB Road, Tinsukia to the new site at Dag No. 158 and PP No. 15, situated at Gellapukhuri Road, Katchujan Gaon, Mouza- Rangagora, Tinsukia. The Inspector of Excise, Tinsukia Sadar had recommended the shifting of the petitioner’s wine shop to the new site as per the enquiry report dated 30.11.2024. The District Commissioner, Tinsukia thereafter issued a letter dated 30.11.2024 to the Commissioner of Excise, Assam stating that the proposal for shifting the petitioner’s wine shop had been recommended, as there was nothing adverse found against the proposal. Consequently, the Commissioner of Excise, Assam gave the approval for shifting the petitioner’s wine shop, vide letter dated 09.01.2025, subject to clearance of all outstanding liabilities by the petitioner. The petitioner subsequently cleared all his outstanding liabilities and paid the required fee of Rs.2,00,000/- on 21.11.2024 and the rest on 31.03.2025. 7. As can be seen from the Court records, the necessary permission/granting approval for shifting the petitioner’s wine shop has been given by all the competent authorities. The petitioner also paid the required fees for the same. However, the District Commissioner has apparently not allowed the petitioner to shift to his new location because of some objections made by some of the residents of the new neighbourhood. Once approval has been given, the District Commissioner should not have stopped the petitioner from relocating his wine shop, unless there was something to show that the provisions of the Assam Excise Act, 2000 and/or Assam Excise Rules, 2016 had been violated. The petitioner has also not been given any document by the District Commissioner Page No.# 4/4 showing the written objections, apparently submitted by some of the residents of the neighbourhood against the proposed establishment of the petitioner’s wine shop, which the petitioner could have replied to, if he was given a copy of the same. Further, it is not understood as to why only the petitioner’s wine shop is being targeted, when there is one other wine shop existing in the area. 8. The above being said, due to the fact that approval has already been given to the petitioner for transfer of his wine shop and as the same is not in violation of the Assam Excise Act, 2000 and Assam Excise Rules, 2016, the respondents are directed not to restrain the petitioner from shifting his wine shop from TMB Ward No. 10, GNB Road, Tinsukia to the new site at Dag No. 158 and PP No. 15, situated at Gellapukhuri Road, Katchujan Gaon, Mouza- Rangagora, Tinsukia and allow him to operate the same forthwith. 9. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant