Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010168772025 2025:GAU-AS:10341 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4399/2025 ALOK PAREEK PROPRIETOR OF M/S NEW WINE SHOP, SON OF RIDHI KARAN PAREEK, RESIDENT OF 4TH FLOOR, BAID COMPLEX, R.K. CHOUDHURY ROAD, KUMARPARA, NEAR NAAMGHAR, KUMARPARA, BHARALUMUKH, DIST. KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM-781009. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE JOINT SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER SONITPUR AT TEZPUR ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE SONITPUR DISTRICT TEZPUR SONITPUR ASSA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. N. Chaudhury, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Gogoi, Standing Counsel BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 06.08.2025 Heard Mr. N. Chaudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. R.R. Gogoi, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the Excise Department. 2. This Court takes up the instant writ petition for disposal at the motion stage itself. 3. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order dated 19.07.2025 whereby the Commissioner of Excise, Assam i.e. the respondent No. 3 had rejected the application filed by the petitioner for shifting of the IMFL “OFF” license shop to another location. The ground on which it has been rejected as would appear from the order dated 19.07.2025 is that the proposed place of shifting of the IMFL “OFF” license shop of the petitioner is 55 meters to the nearest IMFL “OFF”/”ON” shop. Page No.# 3/5 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the said ground on which the impugned order dated 19.07.2025 was passed is not in conformity with the Assam Excise Act, 2000 (for short, “the Act of 2000”) and the Rules framed therein under. The learned counsel further submitted that earlier in Rule 288 of the Assam Excise Rules, 2016 (for short, “the Rules of 2016”) there was a provision whereby on account of close proximity with another IMFL “OFF”/”ON” shop there can be a rejection for setting up of a IMFL “ON” or “OFF” shop in the nearby locality. The learned counsel for the petitioner however submitted that Rule 288 of the Rules of 2016 has since been omitted vide the Notification dated 13.12.2018 and as such, the decision which is based upon a non-existent Rule is nothing, but a malice in law. 5. Mr. R.R. Gogoi, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Excise Department fairly submitted that the reason on which the application of the petitioner for shifting to a nearby location has been rejected do not appear to be sound, taking into account that Rule 288 of the Rules of 2016 is no longer in existence. He however submitted that there may be other reasons, for which, such application may be rejected and therefore it would be in the interest of justice that a direction be issued to the Commissioner of Excise, Assam to reconsider the Page No.# 4/5 said application of the petitioner by taking into consideration that Rule 288 of the Rules of 2016 has already been omitted vide the Notification dated 13.12.2018. 6. This Court having heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and having perused the materials on record as well as the Act of 2000 and the Rules framed therein under is of the opinion that the basis on which the impugned order dated 19.07.2025 was passed is based upon a non-existent Rule and as such, the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. 7. This Court further is of the opinion that a direction is required to be issued to the Commissioner of Excise, Assam to reconsider the application of the petitioner in terms with the Act of 2000 as well as the Rules framed therein under. 8. Accordingly, the instant with petition therefore stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The impugned order dated 19.07.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Excise, Assam, thereby rejecting the application of the petitioner for shifting from Rangapara, Ward No. 3 to 2 No. Dolabari, Tezpur is set aside and quashed. (ii) This Court directs the Commissioner of Excise, Assam to reconsider the application so submitted by the petitioner Page No.# 5/5 for shifting of his IMFL “OFF” license shop from Rangapara, Ward No. 3 to 2 No. Dolabari, Tezpur in terms with the extant law i.e. the Assam Excise Act, 2000 as well as the Rules framed therein under. (iii) The said exercise be done within a period of 2 (two) months from the date, a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the respondent No. 3 i.e. the Commissioner of Excise, Assam. JUDGE Comparing Assistant