IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.488 of 2011 ====================================================== Akhauri Dharmendra Kumar, son of late Akhauri Jainandan Prasad, resident of Mohalla Bahuar Chaura, P.S. Civil Lines, Distt. Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Secretary Excise Department, Bihar, Patna. 2. Board of Revenue, through its Chairman, Bihar, Patna. 3. Assistant Commissioner, Excise, Gaya. 4. Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Kumari Amrita, G.P.-10 with Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Upadhyay, AC to GP-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 12 15-12-2011 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by one Akhauri Dharmendra Kumar, a licensee of the Beer Bar in Gaya district. The petitioner has challenged the Government Notification dated 3rd September 2010 issued in exercise of powers conferred by Section 90 of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915. Under the impugned Notification the State Government has increased the licence fee for independent Beer Bar for cities and towns in the State of Bihar. The licence fee, as far as Gaya is concerned, having a population of more than one lakh, has been increased to Rs. 3 lakhs. Learned advocate Mr. Sanjeev Kumar has appeared for the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner was granted licence Patna High Court CWJC No.488 of 2011 (12) dt.15-12-2011 2 / 3 2 for the financial year 2010-11. He was required to pay a licence fee of Rs. 75,000/-. The said licence fee was unilaterally increased to Rs. 1,50,000/- retrospectively and the petitioner was asked to pay a sum of Rs. 75,000/- which the petitioner did pay. Now under the impugned Notification the aforesaid increase of Rs. 1,50,000/- has been withdrawn and increased licence fee of Rs. 3,00,000/- has been imposed for the coming financial year 2011-12. He has submitted that the increase in licence fee for a Beer Bar alone, will lead to unhealthy competition as the other liquor shops will be able to sell the liquor at a price much lower than the petitioner. Though Mr. Sanjeev Kumar has submitted that the petitioner cannot afford to pay the increased licence fee of Rs. 3,00,000/- and that the petitioner would suffer a huge loss, the submission has not been supported by the relevant materials. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar has failed to demonstrate before us that the increased licence fee will lead to unhealthy competition amongst the licensees of the Beer Bar and the licensees of the liquor shops. Learned advocate Mrs. Kumari Amrita has appeared for the respondent-State. She has submitted that the licence fee has been increased keeping in view such fees charged by the other States in India; to increase the Government revenue to be utilized for the public purposes. In our opinion, the levy of licence fee is a matter of policy decision. The Court would not interfere with such policy decision unless the fee is levied without the authority of law or it is vitiated by malafide. In the present case there is no challenge either to the authority of the Government to increase the licence fee or to the bonafide of the State Government. Only contention raised before Patna High Court CWJC No.488 of 2011 (12) dt.15-12-2011 3 / 3 3 us is that of unhealthy competition. As recorded hereinabove we are not satisfied in respect of allegation of unhealthy competition. We see no merit in this petition. Petition is dismissed in limine. B.Tiwary/Anjani /- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)