CWP No. 8959 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CWP No. 8959 of 2010 and CWP No.9073 of 2010 Date of Decision: 17.05.2010 1. Birmati ...Petititioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents. 2. Kuldeep Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. R.N. Lohan Advocate for the petitioner. ... Alok Singh, J. 1. In the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner is assailing order dated 5.4.2010 passed by the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-ASPIO-cum-Nodal Officer (RTI), Jind, thereby rejecting the application of the petitioner, seeking permit under Rule 22-A of the Punjab Liquor Permit and Pass Rules, 1932 CWP No. 8959 of 2010 2 [as applicable to Haryana] (hereinafter referred to as the 1932 Rules). 2. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner applied under Rule 22-A of the 1932 Rules, for permit for purchase, possession and transportation of liquor exceeding limit furnished by the department for bonafide consumption. Application of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that after verification of antecedents, it was found that the husband of the applicant – Zile Singh is a habitual offender of Section 61(1) (aaa) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, hence application is not bonafide. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. It is the subjective satisfaction of the officer to grant or not to grant the permit under Rule 22-A of the 1932 Rules, for bonafide consumption. In view of the fact that on verification, husband of the petitioner was found habitual offender of the Excise Department, permission seems to be rightly refused to the petitioner. No interference is called for. 4. Dismissed. 5. A photocopy of the order be placed on the file of connected case. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 17.05.2010 sk.