ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has prayed this court for direction upon the respondent nos. 4 and 5 i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi and Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Ranchi to grant permission to export beer to other States of India without seeking the approval of the Excise Commissioner as the same is not required under Rules 11 to 15 made by the Government in notification no. 471-F dated 15.01.1919 for the export of foreign liquor to the other States of India. The petitioner has also challenged the impugned direction contained in letter no. 280 dated 22.02.2006 (Annexure-3) whereby it has been asked to pay export pass fee at the same rate, which has been fixed for the foreign liquor other than beer under Rule 106 A. 3. According to the petitioner, it is a private limited company engaged in business of brewery and having a license in Form-18 to construct and work brewery and Form-19B to deposit or keep beer under bond in a warehouse authorized by the Excise Commissioner. He has also license in Form-19C for the sale of beer to other wholesalers. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that under rules framed in exercise of power conferred upon the State Government under Section 89 of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the State Government provides requirement of holding license for sale of foreign liquor and Rule 13 deals with the preparation of passes for the export of foreign liquor. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 10 of the Act read with Order 11 (2) contained in the Government Notification No. 470-F, dated 15th January,1919, the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 themselves are empowered to grant the petitioner permission to export beer to other States of India as according to the petitioner, the respondent no. 3 has himself admitted vide Annexure-1. However, the petitioner is aggrieved by the order contained in letter no. 280 Ranchi 22.02.2006 by which the Excise Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Excise & Prohibition, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi has directed the petitioner to deposit export pass fee on the export of beer treating it to be same category of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. 3 has himself admitted vide Annexure-1. However, the petitioner is aggrieved by the order contained in letter no. 280 Ranchi 22.02.2006 by which the Excise Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Excise & Prohibition, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi has directed the petitioner to deposit export pass fee on the export of beer treating it to be same category of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under relevant provision of the rule 106A and the notification, only Indian Made Foreign Liquor being exported outside the state are required to be accompanied with export pass fee as prescribed rate. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order preferred a representation contained in Annexure-4 series annexing the notification of the Board of Revenue, Bihar dated 11.12.2004 and submits that no export fee on beer is levied within the State of Jharkhand. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the notification contained at Annexure-6 to the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner, which is resolution of Department of Excise & Prohibition, Government of Jharkhand, contained in Memo No. 1/NITI-10-135-2007-604 Ranchi dated 07.05.2008. By referring to Clause-(xvii) of the said resolution wherein at Column-6 thereof, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would apparent that export pass fee has been levied at Rs. 0.50 per Bulk Litre on Beer. In the column of prevalent rate, it has been categorically shown that no rate was prescribed for the export pass fee for the beer. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of order contained in Annexure-3, the petitioner had deposited export pass fee to the tune of Rs. 8,69,035/-by various Challans, which are annexed as Annexue -5 series to the supplementary affidavit for the period 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. Therefore, it is submitted that levy of export pass fee on beer before coming into force of the resolution contained in Annexure-6 dated 07.05.2008 is wholly improper and unjustified in the eyes of law and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for refund of the same. 5. Respondent have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Memo No. 280 dated 22.02.2006 has been issued on the basis of the notification no. 470F dated 15.01.1919 which categorically says that beer has been included in the category of Foreign Liquor. 5. Respondent have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Memo No. 280 dated 22.02.2006 has been issued on the basis of the notification no. 470F dated 15.01.1919 which categorically says that beer has been included in the category of Foreign Liquor. Based on interpretation of the aforesaid notification, it has been submitted that Rule 106 A includes not only Foreign Liquor but beer also and hence, the petitioner has been asked to deposit export pass fee on beer for export to other states. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the relevant materials on record. The direction of levy of export pass fee on export of beer to other states on the petitioner is being justified on the basis of the notification of 1919 by treating it at par with Indian made foreign liquor under Rule 106A of the Rules framed under Bihar Excise Act, 1915. Rule 106A of the Bihar Excise Act, 1915 as follows:- “106A. India made Foreign liquor may be exported to any place outside Bihar, provided that an export pass fee at the rate of [Rs.6 (Rupees Six)] per London Proof Litre has been levied and realised in the State of Bihar.” 7. Apparently, Rule 106A of the Act does not include beer for the purposes of levy of export pass fee. From the perusal of the resolution dated 07.05.2008 Annexure-6, it is, however, apparent that before coming into force of the instant resolution, no rate was prescribed for export pass fee for export of beer to other States from the State of Jharkhand. In the circumstances, the contention of the petitioner appears to be justified. The petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 8,69,035/-towards excise export fee on beer on the basis of the direction issued vide letter dated 22.02.2006, which has been impugned in the present writ petition. Therefore, it appears that the impugned letter has been issued without proper appreciation of prevalent Rules and notifications applicable to the levy of export pass fee specifically on the export of beer. 8. In the circumstances, letter no. 280 dated 22.02.2006 contained in Annexure-3, cannot be sustained and it is, accordingly, quashed. 9. In the circumstances, the matter is remanded back to respondent no. 8. In the circumstances, letter no. 280 dated 22.02.2006 contained in Annexure-3, cannot be sustained and it is, accordingly, quashed. 9. In the circumstances, the matter is remanded back to respondent no. 2, the Excise Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Excise & Prohibition, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi to consider the case of the petitioner for refund of the export pass fee deposited for export of beer on prior direction contained in letter dated 22.02.2006 (Annexure-3). The respondent no. 2 shall consider the same afresh in terms of the Act and Rule and the relevant notifications/resolutions by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 16 weeks in accordance with law after the receipt/production of a copy of this order and the same shall be communicated to the petitioner. If the amount of export pass fee deposited by the petitioner is found to be wrongly realized, the same should be refunded to the petitioner with statutory interest. 10. This writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.