Case: Lakshmi Narain And Others Vs. District Excise Officer, Fatehpur &amp; Ors

1. We have today disposed of a batch of writ of petitions arising underthe Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (Annexure A). There the petitioner had challenged Sec. 59(f)(v) and rule 37 as unconstitutional. In the present batch of writ petitions he contention is identical except that the enactment and rule are formally different but in pari materiaSec. 41(e)(v) of the U.P. Excise Act empowers the Excise Commissioner to make rules fixing the days and hours during which licensed p remises may be kept opened or closed. Rule 13 is one such rule which forbids sale of liquor of all Tuesdays as well as the first day of every month`. Aggrieved byrule 13 (as amended), because it prohibits liquor trade on the 1st of every month the petitioners, who are licensees, have come up to this Court challenging its vires.

Reasoning: 3. It is easy to see that the provisions in the Punjab Law, challenged unsuccessfully before us, and the se U.P. provisions are virtually the same. The contentions put forward by counsel for the petitioners and the submissions by the Solicitor General and shri O. P. Rana in reply are also identical with what we have heard and considered in the Pun jab cases. Indeed, the U.P. cases, from the point of view of the State, are stronger because the licences were awarded at public auctions and all the conditions now objected to in these writ petitions regarding closure of business on certain days a re printed in the auction notice. With full knowledge of these restrictions, which they considered reasonable when they participated in the bids (and which we consider reasonable for reasons we have given in the Punjab cases), they took the licences. So their present challenge must meet with its Waterloo in the decision of this Court in the Punjab Cases.