2025:UHC:9180-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY Writ Petition (M/B) No. 859 of 2025 14th October, 2025 Maa Sheetla Udyog Pvt. Ltd. -------Petitioner Versus District Magistrate, Nainital -----------Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.S.Bisht, learned Standing Counsel for the State. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGEMENT : (per Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, J.) The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition with the following prayer: (a) A writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the District Magistrate, Nainital/respondent to renew the FL3-B and FL-1 license of the petitioner forthwith taking into consideration that the petitioner is already having the license for production i.e. FLM-3 issued by the Uttarakhand Excise Commissioner on 29.05.2025 and further direct to decide the application preferred by the petitioner for the renewal of the license FL3-B dated 22.04.2025 (Annexure No. 2) and application for renewal of FL-1 License dated 22.05.2025 as early as possible for the year 2025- 1 2025:UHC:9180-DB 26 (Annexure No. 6) . 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the license for production /FLM-3 was renewed by the Excise Commissioner, Uttarakhand on 29.05.2025, however, the application for renewal of FL-3B license for blending/bottling and the license for mother bond/dispatch to FL-2 which is known as FL-1 is pending with the District Magistrate, Nainital since May 2025 despite the fact that all the necessary documents and requisite license fee has been deposited and in absence of any decision on the said application, the petitioner is not able to start the production 3. Learned counsel for the respondent on instructions submitted that Shri Tushar Agarwal, who was earlier Director of the Company; at the time when the license was granted; is having excise dues and against him recovery proceedings are initiated and, as such, the application for renewal is pending. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner before the Court is a company and any liability/outstanding dues of an earlier Director cannot be made a ground for non –considering the application of the petitioner. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the submission made by the counsel for the respondent is bereft of merit. The company is an independent legal entity and outstanding dues of a Director of the company cannot be made a ground for not considering the application for renewal submitted by the company, moreover in the present case, the said person is 2 2025:UHC:9180-DB no longer a Director of the company. 6. The District Magistrate is directed to consider the application made by the petitioner for renewal of FL3-B and FL-1 license within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of finally. (G.NARENDAR, C.J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY,J.) Dated: 14.10.2025 Kaushal 3