Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66679-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1460 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rohit Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and 3 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheo Kinkar Singh, Surya Prakash Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- Nimai Dass (A.C.S.C.) Hon'ble Arun Bhansali, Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved of the order dated 15.06.2020 passed by the District Collector, Fatehpur, whereby the licence of beer shop granted to him for the year 2019-20, has been cancelled and his security deposit has been forfeited. 2. Submissions have been made that on account of cancellation of petitioner's licence pertaining to country liquor, the licence of the beer shop was also cancelled, despite the fact that there was no discrepancy in operating the shop in question and, therefore, the action of the respondents in this regard was contrary to the settled position of law. 3. Learned Standing Counsel made submissions that the petition has been filed after a passage of five years, without any explanation for the delay. Further submissions, based on the instructions, have been made that on cancellation of the licence of the petitioner, the same was auctioned twice for 14 days and for the third time for 7 days. Thereafter, for the year 2020-21, the same was allotted to one Smt. Neetu Singh through e-lottery and thereafter renewed from 2021-2022 to 2024-25 every year and now the State has come out with a provision of composite shops and, therefore, the beer shops are no more in existence and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that as the beer shop can now not be allotted, the respondents be directed to refund the security deposit, as the cancellation is contrary to the law laid down in the case of Sandeep Singh Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others : Writ Tax No. 816 of 2021, wherein Division Bench, after following the judgement in the case of Sandeep Singh Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others : Writ Tax No.278 of 2020, has laid down that on account of cancellation of once licence, another licence cannot be cancelled. 5. Learned Standing Counsel made submissions that the facts of the instant case are different. 6. Be that as it may, in so far as the plea pertaining to the restoration of the shop is concerned, the same relief on account of delay/ the fact that now beer shops are not licensed, cannot be granted. So far as the refund of the security deposit is concerned, the petitioner may approach the Licensing Authority by way of a detailed representation regarding refund of the security deposit and it is expected of the Licensing Authority to pass a speaking order on the said representation, keeping in view the law laid down in the case of Sandeep Singh (supra) to the extent of refund of security deposit. 7. With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Sazia/SL (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad