Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The writ application has been filed by the petitioner for directing respondent no.2-Collector, Gopalganj, to make settlement of country liquor retail outlet shop at Gopalganj-II (hereinafter referred to as Shop No.II) in favour of the petitioner. 3. The admitted position is that a notification dated 1.3.2002 (Annexure 1) was issued for the settlement of retail outlets of country liquor, spiced country liquor and India made foreign liquor in the district of Gopalganj. The petitioner in terms of the notification dated 1.3.2002 (Annexure 1) applied for settlement of Shop no.ll. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Collector, Gopalganj, is not making settlement of shop No.ll and insisting upon him to take settlement of another shop also, known as Gopalganj-I (hereinafter referred to as Shop No.I), along with Shop No.II. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present writ application. 5. From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the State, it appears that the said assertion of the petitioner has not been denied. According to the Collector, Gopalganj, Shop No.I is the high revenue earning shop and according to him both the shops should be settled to one and the same person. 6. In our views, there was no such condition in the said notification (Annexure 1) as the bids were invited with regard to each of the shops separately. In that view of the matter, the Collector, Gopalganj, cannot put a condition contrary to the terms of the said notification (Annexure 1). As the petitioner has applied for settlement of Shop No.ll, his case for settlement of the same has to be considered in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Collector, Gopalganj, is directed to take a decision with regard to the settlement of Shop No. II within a period of ten days from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ application stands disposed of.