news details |
|
|
| License issue HC upholds Excise Commissioner’s order | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Dec 24:- The High Court today upheld the order of the Excise Commissioner dated August 12, 2005. The order debars persons of 40 years and above from getting a license from the department.
The order was today passed by Justice Hakim Imtiaz in a petition challenging the commissioner’s order.
According to the petition, the Excise Commissioner vide notice dated Jun 25, 2005 issued an advertisement whereby 90 different locations were advertised for grant of new off-licenses by draw of lot. Notice provided that due preference will give to the educated unemployed youth and ex-servicemen as per the policy. The petitioner being eligible to get license applied for the same. Draw of lots which were held on August 9, 2005 under the supervision of Divisional Commissioner Jammu and Excise Commissioner. Result of draw of lot was published and the petitioner got selected for location Nandpur Tehsil Samba. According to the petitioner he completed all the formalities and deposited an amount of Rs 10,000 in the office of Deputy Excise Commissioner. The Deputy Excise Commissioner processed the case of the petitioner for grant of off-license and forward file to ETO Kathua. Petitioner stated that that he spend a considerable amount but despite all this license was not granted to him that applicant who are above of the age of 40 years and challenged the same.
The court after hearing the parties Observed that the petitioner was above 40 years of age so he was not covered under the category of Educated unemployed youth. It also appeared that the petitioner has wrongly applied under the said category and when the respondents found a mistake had been committed they took remedial measures in the matter. In the peculiar circumstances court find that the principles of promissory estoppels are not attracted in the present case. So far contention regarding challenged to the policy is concerned Court could not find any force in the submissions for the reason that the petitioner had applied and participated on the basis of said policy as such, he cannot turn round and asked for setting-aside the same. The judgment referred would shows that this issue has already been dealt with by this High Court and contention in this behalf stands rejected. With these observations Court dismissed the petition. JNF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
