LexM. R. PATEL versus STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D ., G H M. R. PATEL v. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS January 5, 1965 693 [P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J., M. HIDAYATULLAH, 1. C. SHAH, S. M. S!KRI AND R. S. BACHAWAT 11.J Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (Bihar and Orissa Act 2 of 1915}, u. 8, 35, 38 to 91-Board of Revenue-Issue of Directions-Whether could increase security deposit-Powers of Revision-If exercisable suo motu-Limitation. Consequent upon a direction by the Board of Revenue, Bihar, fixing tho security deposit ot Excise shops working under a certain system, the Commissioner of Excise directed realisation of the defecit in the security depooit of the appellant's shops. The appellant moved the Board ot Revenue for revision of the Excise Commissioner's order. The Board of Revonue held that it was open to the appellant to move the Excise Com· missioner for relief. Subsequently on the appellant's motion the Exciso Commissioner in supersession of his previous order, directed that in the special circumstances of the case, the security depoit in respect of the appellant's shop need not be increased. In spite of a representation made by the Deputy Commissioner, the Excise Commissioner refused to revise his order. At the request of the Deputy Commissioner the Commissioner of the Division referred the matter to the Board of Revenue. After hearing the appellant, in exercise of its powers of revision under s. 8 of the Act the Board, suo motu, set aside the order of the Excise Commissioner with the direction that until the expiry of the current licences there would be no change in the amount of security, but proper security in terms of the eeneral directions by the Board should be demanded from the appel- lant at the time of the renewal of the licenses. In appeal, HELD : (i) Neither the orginal order nor the subsequent order was passed by the Excise Commissioner under s. 35 on a consideration of the matters referred to in that section. The finality of s. 35 did not attach to these orders and the Board of Revenue had ample power to revise them · under s. 8. [696 B-C] (ii) On a true construction ot ss. 38 and 91 of the Act, the Board in exercise of its powers under s. 38 road with s. 91 could from time to time issue general directions with regard to the conditions of any licence sranted under the Act including the amount of security to be deposited by the licensee. [696 G-H] (iii) Instruction No. IOI (10) of the Board of Revenue at p. 30 of Vol. III of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Mannual, 1955 Ed. read with Board's circular letter No. 8624 dated September 9, 1956 did not prevent onhancement of security at the time of the renewal of license. [ 697 C-DJ (iv) The Board ot Revenue may exercise its powers of revision under 1. 8(3) suo motu. [697 E-F] (v) In a case where the Board exercises its power of revision of its own motion, no question of limitation arises. [697 HJ CML APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 331 of 1962. 694 SUPRBMB COURT REPORTS (1965) 2 S.C.ll. Appeal by special leave from the Resolution dated October 4, A 1959 of the Board of Revenue, Bihar, in Case No. 124 of 1959. Rajeswari Prasad and S. P. Varma, for the appellant. C. K. Daphtary, Attorney-General, R. K. Garg, S. C. A.gar- wala and D. P. Singh, for the respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. The appellant holds yearly licenses for the retail sale of country spirit in respect of six shops in the town of. Jamshedpur working under the sliding scale system under the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (Bihar and Orissa Act 2 of 1915) hereinafter referred to as the Act. A total sum ot Rs. 11,099 was demanded and paid as security in respect of all the licenses. The original licenses in respect of the six shops were issued long ago and were renewed from year to year. By an order dated June 27, 1956, the Board of Revenue, Bihar directed that "the security deposit of an Excise shop working under the sliding scale system is hereby fixed as equivalent to two months' average license fees of the shop." The security depos!t payable by the appellant on the basis of this direction would amount to about Rs. 68,000. On November 14, 1956, the Com- missioner of Excise, Bihar directed the Deputy Commissioner, Singhbhum to realise from the appellant the deficit in the security deposits of his shops. This order was communicated to the appellant on December 7, 1956. On January 9, 1957, the appel- lant
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.