Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010103532026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2783/2026 DEBOTTAM ROY SON OF LATE GOPAL CHANDRA ROY, R/O- SURYA SEN LANE, PUBLIC SCHOOL ROAD, SILCNAR, P.S. SILCHAR, DISTRICT. - CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788007. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, EXCISE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DIST.- CACHAR SILCHAR ASSAM. PIN-788001. 4:THE SUPERINTERDENT OF EXCISE DIST.- CACHAR SILCHAR ASSAM. PIN-788001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K DEKA, MR. I H LASKAR,MR. P DAIMARY,MR. R. KARIM,J MEDHI Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, EXCISE DEPTT. Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 15.07.2026 Heard Shri P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri R.R. Gogoi, learned Standing, Counsel Excise Department, Assam as well as Shri M. Chetia, learned State Counsel, Assam. Considering the subject matter and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. As per the facts projected, an IMFL licence was issued to the petitioner in the year 1994. However, due to some reasons, the same was cancelled along with lodging of an FIR as well as a complaint. The complaint was, however, withdrawn in the year 2023 and so far as the FIR is concerned, as no progress was made the petitioner had challenged the same and it was quashed by this Court on 15.07.2025. Shri Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there would be no reason not to renew the licence which, however, has not been done and accordingly, the petition has been filed. He has also submitted that there is a prayer for consideration of his representation towards renewal of the licence which is also not done. Notice was issued on 17.06.2026 pursuant to which, Shri Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions and has, amongst others submitted that though the initial order of suspension was put to challenge and the matter was remanded back for a fresh consideration, the second order of suspension has not been put to challenge in any further proceedings. On the other hand, Shri Deka, learned counsel has submitted that the complaint, which was the very basis of suspension, was withdrawn in the year 2023 and this Page No.# 3/3 Court also quashed the criminal case vide order dated 15.07.2025. He accordingly submits that there cannot be any sustainable reasons for not renewing the suspension order. At this stage, Shri Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel submits that there are certain changes in the existing laws. Be that as it may and in the interest of justice, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner is required to be considered as the very basis of the suspension does not exist. This Court has noticed that a detail representation dated 30.07.2025 before the District Commissioner, Cachar is pending. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant writ petition is closed by directing the District Commissioner, Cachar to take on board the aforesaid representation dated 30.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner and pass a Speaking Order on the same by considering all the relevant facts and circumstances, including the aspect of non-existence of any complaint which was the basis of such suspension. In such consideration, the petitioner be afforded a personal hearing. The aforesaid exercise is directed to be undertaken and completed within a period of 60 days from today. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. It is made clear that the final order that may be passed by the District Commissioner, Cachar is required to be communicated to the petitioner. JUDGE Comparing Assistant