Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1370 (RAJ)

Laxmi v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-05-02

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2022
JUDGMENT Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - Nobody was present on behalf of the petitioner on 28.04.2022. Even today, nobody is present. 2. Counsel for the respondents informs the Court that controversy involved in this petition has already been adjudicated by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Jaipur Bench) in bunch of cases led by Smt. anju Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18549/2019) on 21.01.2020. 3. The order aforesaid reads as follows:- 'By way of these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the notice issued on various dates (annexure-3) with regard to overcharging the price of IMFL/Beer. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that apprehension of the petitioners is that the respondents will not act in accordance with the provisions of Rajasthan Excise act, 1950, therefore the petitioners under this impression have directly approached this court at the notice stage. Counsel further submits that the respondents be directed to hear the petitioners and decide the matter in accordance with the provisions of Rajasthan Excise act,1950. Mr. M.S. Singhvi, learned advocate General submits that the reply submitted by the petitioners to the notice (annexure-3)issued to each of the petitioner, will be considered by the respondents in accordance with the provisions of Rajasthan Excise act, 1950. In that view of the matter, all the writ petitions stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the matter within a period of one month after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioners with regard to the notice (annexure3). Copy of this order be separately placed in each connected file'. 4. Counsel for the respondents submits that order squarely covers the issue in hand. 5. accordingly, the application under article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacation of interim order as well as the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the matter within a period of one month after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with regard to the notice.