Case Note & Summary
The case involves two writ appeals arising from a common order dated 07.09.2022 passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.50353/2019. The appellant in WA No.1318/2022, Smt. Savitha K.R., and the appellant in WA No.26/2023, Sri. K. Manjunath, challenged the order which set aside the grant of a CL-2 liquor license in favor of Sri. K. Manjunath. The respondents, including the legal heirs of late Jayashankar, had filed the writ petition contending that the license was granted in violation of Rule 8(2) of the Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968, which prohibits the grant of a license within 100 meters of a place of worship. The facts reveal that the license was granted for a premises located near a temple, and the distance was less than the prescribed 100 meters. The learned Single Judge found that the licensing authority had not considered the distance norm and set aside the license. In the appeals, the appellants argued that the distance was measured correctly and that the license was valid. However, the Division Bench, after examining the records, found that the distance from the temple to the licensed premises was only about 60 meters, clearly violating Rule 8(2). The court held that the grant of license was illegal and contrary to public interest. The court further observed that the writ court had correctly exercised its jurisdiction to quash the license. The appeals were dismissed, and the order of the learned Single Judge was upheld. The court directed the authorities to ensure compliance with the distance norms in future licensing.
Headnote
A) Excise Law - Distance Norms - Rule 8(2) of Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968 - License Cancellation - The issue pertained to the grant of a CL-2 liquor license within 100 meters of a temple, violating mandatory distance norms. The court held that the license was granted in contravention of statutory rules and public interest, and the writ court correctly set aside the license. (Paras 1-10) B) Excise Law - Public Interest - Mandatory Conditions - The court emphasized that excise licenses must comply with all statutory conditions, including distance from religious places, to protect public interest. Non-compliance renders the license void ab initio. (Paras 5-8) C) Excise Law - Judicial Review - Interference with License - The court held that the writ court's interference was justified as the license was granted illegally, and the licensee cannot claim any vested right in an illegal grant. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the grant of a CL-2 liquor license in violation of the distance requirement of 100 meters from a place of worship as per Rule 8(2) of the Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules, 1968 is valid and whether the writ court erred in setting aside the license.
Final Decision
Both writ appeals are dismissed. The order dated 07.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.50353/2019 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Distance norms for liquor licenses
- Rule 8(2) of Karnataka Excise (Sale of Indian and Foreign Liquors) Rules
- 1968
- Public interest in excise licensing
- Non-compliance with mandatory conditions
- Cancellation of license for violation of statutory rules
