SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 14D WPMS No. 978 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos. 1 to 4. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the respondent nos. 5. It is a grievance of the petitioner that he was licensee of the Indian-made foreign liquor shop, Landhaura, Roorkee, District Haridwar for the year 2024-25. He submitted application for renewal for the year 2025-26, but it has not been considered. Therefore, the petitioner seeks direction that the respondents may directed to consider the application of the petitioner and consequently, renew the license for Indian-made foreign liquor shop, Landhaura, Roorkee, District Haridwar in favour of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the application for renewal of the license was rejected by the order no. 25268 dated 20.03.2025 by the respondent no.1/Excise Commissioner, State of Uttarakhand. At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondent no.5 would submit that the order which has been passed on 20.03.2025 by the respondent no.1/Excise Commissioner, State of Uttarakhand may be challenged in revision under Section 11 (2) of the United Provinces Excise Act, 1910 (“the Act”). Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may prefer a revision, but generally the revisions are not decided for a long and it causes unnecessary harm to the revisionist. Since, the petitioner has an alternate remedy to challenge the order rejecting his application for renewal by the respondent no.1/Excise Commissioner, State of Uttarakhand on 20.03.2025, the petition may not be entertained. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed. The petition is dismissed. However, if a revision is filed under Section 11 (2) of the Act, this Court has no doubt that proceedings of the revision shall not be unnecessarily delayed. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 07.04.2025 Jitendra