Puranjay Singh vs Others

1. Heard Ms. Alina Masoodi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajesh Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State Respondents No. 1 to 5 & 7, Mr. Siddharth Tripathi, Advocate, who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no.6, which is taken on record, and Sri Dhruv Mathur, Advocate who prays for impleadment as a respondent on the ground that he is the license holder of the shop selling liquor which is close to the shop of the petitioner currently situated.

2. This Court had earlier granted Sri Dhruv Mathur a right of hearing and he wishes such right be given to him today also in these proceedings.

3. Since we are disposing of the matter at the admission stage, without making observations with regard to the right of the petitioner to run the shop from the location in which it is currently situated, we do not wish to record the submissions of Sri Dhruv Mathur, at this stage, leaving it open for him to come again to the Court seeking a hearing in case a fresh writ petition is filed by the petitioner.

4. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Respondent No.3 as 2 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondent Authorities not to give effect to the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 as contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondents to not to interfere in the peaceful running of the composite licensed liquor shop of the Petitioner from the shop located at Shop No. LGF-1, Bhagirath Complex, Dandahiya Bazar, Kursi Road, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow Uttar Pradesh - 226024."

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had been allotted a license to run a composite liquor shop within the area of Dandahiya Bazar. An oral order was issued to him by the District Excise Officer asking him to close the shop. The petitioner filed Writ- C No. 4581 of 2025 where this Court passed an interim order on 16.05.2025 directing the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow to make an on the spot inspection and conduct an inquiry, as to whether the composite liquor shop of the petitioner was being run in Dandahiya Bazar or not and submit his report in a sealed cover by the next date. The report had to be vetted by the Collector, Lucknow before its submitted to the Court. The other observation made by this Court was regard to operating of liquor shop by the petitioner only on the basis of provisional allotment. The Court had summoned the Excise Officer and he had appeared before the Division Bench on 29.05.2025 and this Court had observed that oral instructions to run the shop or not to run the shop should not be issued. The Excise Officer was at liberty to proceed only in accordance with law, if there is any cause to proceed against the petitioner. The shop in question had been closed on the oral directions of the Excise Officer w.e.f. 27.04.2025. The Court, therefore, gave the liberty to the petitioner to reopen the shop by its order dated 29.05.2025 and also gave liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the 3 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 garb of the liberty granted by this Court in its order dated 29.05.2025, the order dated 08.08.2025 has been issued to the petitioner asking the petitioner to relocate his shop on the basis of certain reports submitted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Executive Engineer, Nagar Nigam and the Area Excise Inspector mention of which has been made in the order, it has been stated that no copies of such reports have been given to the petitioner to enable him to make objections to such report. The District Magistrate on his own has considered such report and has came to the conclusion that the petitioner has not located his shop for composite liquor vend in the area which he had described in his application for license and that the shop in question is located in another area.

7. Sri Rajesh Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions copy of which has been produced before this Court has stated that applications were invited through E-lottery on 06.03.2025, the petitioner has applied and filed an affidavit on 28.02.2025, copy of which has been enclosed. This application was filed in terms of the Excise Rules, 1968 as amended from time to time. The petitioner in his application stated that his shop is located at Dandahiya Bazar. Under Rule 5(1) of the 1968 Rules, the location of a liquor vend is to be decided by the Collector.

8. Under the Uttar Pradesh Number and Location of Excise Shops (6th Amendment) Rules of 2020, Rule 2 (d) makes a mention of site "meaning the boundaries approved for the premises of the shop". It has been stated that in the said instructions that the petitioners shop was allowed to run on provisional allotment since April, 2025, but on the spot inspection was carried out on 04.05.2025 on it being noticed that the shop was not running in Dandahiya Bazar, the shop in question was directed to remain shut till such time that proper location of the shop is established by the petitioner. After the writ petition was disposed of by this Court by its order dated 29.05.2025, leaving it open for the respondents to proceed in accordance with law. The petitioner was issued a letter on 29.05.2025 asking the petitioner to file an appropriate application indicating the correct location of the shop on which he proposes to run the composite liquor vend. The petitioner, again, submitted an application mentioning location of the shop to be the same as the current location, which was 4 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 found to be irregular. Another letter was issued to the petitioner on

03.07.2025 asking the petitioner to indicate the current location of his site on which he proposes to sale liquor. The petitioner sent an undated letter alongwith a copy of his lease agreement which was received in the office of the respondent on 14.07.2025 and insisted that the shop in question is situated in Dandahiya Bazar. The boundaries of the shop as indicated in his letter were different from the location for which provisional allotment was issued. The Executive Engineer, Nagar Nigam, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow and the Area Excise Inspector submitted their reports wherein it was stated that the shop in question was situated in Bhartendu Harishchand Ward on Lower Ground Floor just below Samarpan Library in Bhagirath Complex, which is situated 450 meter away from the main Dandahiya Bazar and the area in which Bhagirath Complex is situated does not fall within Dandahiya Bazar. The Area Excise Inspector also stated that the location of the shop is not in accordance with the application submitted by the petitioner.

9. It has been stated also in the said instructions signed by the District Excise Officer that no license has been issued till date to the petitioner, only a provisional allotment for running the shop was issued to the petitioner, subject to verification of information given by him in his application and affidavit. Now it has been found that the composite liquor vend is situated on a different location, and therefore, site approval by the District Magistrate has been withheld, the petitioner has been asked to suggest an alternative site for location of his shop as is evident from a perusal of the operative portion of the order/letter dated 08.08.2025 which has been challenged in this petition.

10. The written instructions are kept on record.

11. Since the petitioner has been directed to submit an alternate site for location of his shop, which admittedly the petitioner has not done, we cannot allow the petitioner to run his shop on a site that has not been approved by the Collector. We direct the petitioner to move an appropriate application alongwith a lease agreement suggesting an alternate site/location for composite liquor vend within ten days from today to the District Excise Officer concerned. If such an application is 5 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 given by the petitioner, it shall be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders be passed thereon, as expeditiously as possible.

12. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. August 27, 2025 Darpan Sharma (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) DARPAN SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Ms. Alina Masoodi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajesh Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State Respondents No. 1 to 5 & 7, Mr. Siddharth Tripathi, Advocate, who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no.6, which is taken on record, and Sri Dhruv Mathur, Advocate who prays for impleadment as a respondent on the ground that he is the license holder of the shop selling liquor which is close to the shop of the petitioner currently situated.

2. This Court had earlier granted Sri Dhruv Mathur a right of hearing and he wishes such right be given to him today also in these proceedings.

3. Since we are disposing of the matter at the admission stage, without making observations with regard to the right of the petitioner to run the shop from the location in which it is currently situated, we do not wish to record the submissions of Sri Dhruv Mathur, at this stage, leaving it open for him to come again to the Court seeking a hearing in case a fresh writ petition is filed by the petitioner.

4. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Respondent No.3 as 2 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondent Authorities not to give effect to the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 as contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondents to not to interfere in the peaceful running of the composite licensed liquor shop of the Petitioner from the shop located at Shop No. LGF-1, Bhagirath Complex, Dandahiya Bazar, Kursi Road, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow Uttar Pradesh - 226024."

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had been allotted a license to run a composite liquor shop within the area of Dandahiya Bazar. An oral order was issued to him by the District Excise Officer asking him to close the shop. The petitioner filed Writ- C No. 4581 of 2025 where this Court passed an interim order on 16.05.2025 directing the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow to make an on the spot inspection and conduct an inquiry, as to whether the composite liquor shop of the petitioner was being run in Dandahiya Bazar or not and submit his report in a sealed cover by the next date. The report had to be vetted by the Collector, Lucknow before its submitted to the Court. The other observation made by this Court was regard to operating of liquor shop by the petitioner only on the basis of provisional allotment. The Court had summoned the Excise Officer and he had appeared before the Division Bench on 29.05.2025 and this Court had observed that oral instructions to run the shop or not to run the shop should not be issued. The Excise Officer was at liberty to proceed only in accordance with law, if there is any cause to proceed against the petitioner. The shop in question had been closed on the oral directions of the Excise Officer w.e.f. 27.04.2025. The Court, therefore, gave the liberty to the petitioner to reopen the shop by its order dated 29.05.2025 and also gave liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the 3 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 garb of the liberty granted by this Court in its order dated 29.05.2025, the order dated 08.08.2025 has been issued to the petitioner asking the petitioner to relocate his shop on the basis of certain reports submitted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Executive Engineer, Nagar Nigam and the Area Excise Inspector mention of which has been made in the order, it has been stated that no copies of such reports have been given to the petitioner to enable him to make objections to such report. The District Magistrate on his own has considered such report and has came to the conclusion that the petitioner has not located his shop for composite liquor vend in the area which he had described in his application for license and that the shop in question is located in another area.

7. Sri Rajesh Tripathi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions copy of which has been produced before this Court has stated that applications were invited through E-lottery on 06.03.2025, the petitioner has applied and filed an affidavit on 28.02.2025, copy of which has been enclosed. This application was filed in terms of the Excise Rules, 1968 as amended from time to time. The petitioner in his application stated that his shop is located at Dandahiya Bazar. Under Rule 5(1) of the 1968 Rules, the location of a liquor vend is to be decided by the Collector.

8. Under the Uttar Pradesh Number and Location of Excise Shops (6th Amendment) Rules of 2020, Rule 2 (d) makes a mention of site "meaning the boundaries approved for the premises of the shop". It has been stated that in the said instructions that the petitioners shop was allowed to run on provisional allotment since April, 2025, but on the spot inspection was carried out on 04.05.2025 on it being noticed that the shop was not running in Dandahiya Bazar, the shop in question was directed to remain shut till such time that proper location of the shop is established by the petitioner. After the writ petition was disposed of by this Court by its order dated 29.05.2025, leaving it open for the respondents to proceed in accordance with law. The petitioner was issued a letter on 29.05.2025 asking the petitioner to file an appropriate application indicating the correct location of the shop on which he proposes to run the composite liquor vend. The petitioner, again, submitted an application mentioning location of the shop to be the same as the current location, which was 4 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 found to be irregular. Another letter was issued to the petitioner on

03.07.2025 asking the petitioner to indicate the current location of his site on which he proposes to sale liquor. The petitioner sent an undated letter alongwith a copy of his lease agreement which was received in the office of the respondent on 14.07.2025 and insisted that the shop in question is situated in Dandahiya Bazar. The boundaries of the shop as indicated in his letter were different from the location for which provisional allotment was issued. The Executive Engineer, Nagar Nigam, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow and the Area Excise Inspector submitted their reports wherein it was stated that the shop in question was situated in Bhartendu Harishchand Ward on Lower Ground Floor just below Samarpan Library in Bhagirath Complex, which is situated 450 meter away from the main Dandahiya Bazar and the area in which Bhagirath Complex is situated does not fall within Dandahiya Bazar. The Area Excise Inspector also stated that the location of the shop is not in accordance with the application submitted by the petitioner.

9. It has been stated also in the said instructions signed by the District Excise Officer that no license has been issued till date to the petitioner, only a provisional allotment for running the shop was issued to the petitioner, subject to verification of information given by him in his application and affidavit. Now it has been found that the composite liquor vend is situated on a different location, and therefore, site approval by the District Magistrate has been withheld, the petitioner has been asked to suggest an alternative site for location of his shop as is evident from a perusal of the operative portion of the order/letter dated 08.08.2025 which has been challenged in this petition.

10. The written instructions are kept on record.

11. Since the petitioner has been directed to submit an alternate site for location of his shop, which admittedly the petitioner has not done, we cannot allow the petitioner to run his shop on a site that has not been approved by the Collector. We direct the petitioner to move an appropriate application alongwith a lease agreement suggesting an alternate site/location for composite liquor vend within ten days from today to the District Excise Officer concerned. If such an application is 5 WRIC No. 8120 of 2025 given by the petitioner, it shall be considered in accordance with law and appropriate orders be passed thereon, as expeditiously as possible.

12. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. August 27, 2025 Darpan Sharma (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) DARPAN SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench