Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2011
  6. /
  7. January

Paras Nath Agrawal vs State Of U.P. And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 September, 2011

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner had approached the Excise Commissioner under Section 11 (1) of the U.P. Excise Act, feeling aggrieved by the order of the District Magistrate, Basti dated 28.9.2010 whereunder, his request for refund of the bank draft deposited at the time of making of the application for grant of licence under the 2001 Rules, had been rejected.
The appeal was decided under an order dated 14.3.2011 holding therein that the petitioner was entitled to the refund of the security money furnished by way of bank draft within 30 days of the order. This order is not under challenge before this court.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a mandamus directing the Excise Authority to provide interest on the said money which lay deposited with the said respondent since 1.4.2009. The petitioner in fact prays or a mandamus asking the Excise Commissioner to pass orders for payment of interest.
On behalf of learned Standing Counsel, an objection has been taken that this money was utilized by one Sardar Kulvinder Singh on the oral request of the petitioner and therefore, the question of interest does not arise. Sardar Kulvinder Singh is represented by Sri Jitendra Kumar Srivastava, Advocate.
In my opinion, all such issues are no more open to the State once a statutory order has been passed by the Commissioner in exercise of powers under Section 11 (1) of the U.P. Excise Act for refund of the money. If the Collector is not satisfied, he has the remedy of approaching the State Government under Section 11 (2) of the U.P. Excise Act. The order of the Commissioner, unless it is interfered with by the State Government under Section 11 (2) of the Act, has to be given effect to.
This Court may further record that a Division Bench of this Court has held that interest is a necessary corollary to the withholding of the money. It is neither penal, nor compensatory in nature. Accordingly, it is held that the State is under obligation to pay interest on the withheld amount. However, all issues are left open to be examined by the Excise Commissioner and the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner to pass an order on the application of the petitioner for payment of interest on the money which has been directed to be paid under the order dated 14.3.2011, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
In case after refund of the money, the authorities find that there is some shortfall in the licence money payable by Sardar Kulvinder Singh, it will be open to the Collector to take such action as may be warranted under law against said licensee.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 21.9.2011 Jaideep/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Paras Nath Agrawal vs State Of U.P. And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 September, 2011
Judges
  • Arun Tandon