2 weeks Ago By Asseem Shaikh
Pune: The Bombay High Court raised an exception to the state excise minister and the excise commissioner 's "non-application of mind to material discrepancies and forged documents" while they passed a couple of orders on Oct 10, 2024, and July 1, 2024, respectively, related to a questionable transfer of a liquor licence. The high court not only set aside the two impugned (under challenge) orders but also confirmed the Pune district collector 's order of April 5, 2024, that restored the liquor licence to its original holder. The court rejected a plea by the two respondents, in whose name the licence was fraudulently transferred, seeking a stay on its judgment and order to enable them to move an appeal.
Justice Amit Borkar of the high court held on March 25 that the impugned orders "cannot be sustained in law" and failed to appreciate that the collector was well within his powers to recall an order tainted by fraud. "The appellate/revisional authority have in effect legitimised a fraudulent transfer of a statutory licence, which is impermissible in law," the bench said. Shirur resident Ramesh Padmavar and his son, Abhijit, who stays in Chandrapur, had filed a writ petition challenging the excise commissioner's order that cancelled the district collector's order of restoring the FL-II liquor licence for Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) in their favour, and the excise minister's order that dismissed their appeal against the commissioner's order.
The Padmawars held the licence at Warora in Chandrapur district since 1973 but opted for its transfer to Pune after the state govt on March 10, 2015, declared Chandrapur a "dry district". On March 18, 2017, the govt allowed their plea by transferring the licence to Kalyaninagar in Pune. The Padmavars executed a power of attorney (PoA) in favour of one Vyankesh Kotalwar to run their liquor outlet in Pune.
It is alleged that Kotalwar misused the PoA and forged documents to transfer the licence in favour of a father-son businessman duo from Aurangabad. A criminal case was registered with Pune police in 2023 related to this fraudulent transfer and the same is pending trial. Based on the Padmavars' plea and an excise department's inquiry report, the collector on April 5, 2024, restored the licence in favour of Padmavars.
The Mankanis approached the excise commissioner against the collector's order and secured an order in their favour. The Padmavars went into a revision before the excise minister, who then upheld the commissioner's order, prompting them to approach the high court. The high court noted that the revisional authority relied on the commissioner of police's report to conclude that the documents used for transfering licence in favour of Malkanis were not forged, but the report itself was vague, inconclusive and not based on any forensic analysis related to photos, signatures and other material.
The bench opined, "While the outcome of (the pending) criminal proceedings will depend upon detailed trial and adjudication of evidence, this court — while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution — is not precluded from forming a prima facie opinion based on material available on record, including original documents and the outcome of administrative inquiries conducted under the Excise Act." Pune: The Bombay High Court raised an exception to the state excise minister and the excise commissioner's "non-application of mind to material discrepancies and forged documents" while they passed a couple of orders on Oct 10, 2024, and July 1, 2024, respectively, related to a questionable transfer of a liquor licence. The high court not only set aside the two impugned (under challenge) orders but also confirmed the Pune district collector's order of April 5, 2024, that restored the liquor licence to its original holder.
The court rejected a plea by the two respondents, in whose name the licence was fraudulently transferred, seeking a stay on its judgment and order to enable them to move an appeal. Justice Amit Borkar of the high court held on March 25 that the impugned orders "cannot be sustained in law" and failed to appreciate that the collector was well within his powers to recall an order tainted by fraud. "The appellate/revisional authority have in effect legitimised a fraudulent transfer of a statutory licence, which is impermissible in law," the bench said.
Shirur resident Ramesh Padmavar and his son, Abhijit, who stays in Chandrapur, had filed a writ petition challenging the excise commissioner's order that cancelled the district collector's order of restoring the FL-II liquor licence for Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) in their favour, and the excise minister's order that dismissed their appeal against the commissioner's order. The Padmawars held the licence at Warora in Chandrapur district since 1973 but opted for its transfer to Pune after the state govt on March 10, 2015, declared Chandrapur a "dry district". On March 18, 2017, the govt allowed their plea by transferring the licence to Kalyaninagar in Pune.
The Padmavars executed a power of attorney (PoA) in favour of one Vyankesh Kotalwar to run their liquor outlet in Pune. It is alleged that Kotalwar misused the PoA and forged documents to transfer the licence in favour of a father-son businessman duo from Aurangabad. A criminal case was registered with Pune police in 2023 related to this fraudulent transfer and the same is pending trial.
Based on the Padmavars' plea and an excise department's inquiry report, the collector on April 5, 2024, restored the licence in favour of Padmavars. The Mankanis approached the excise commissioner against the collector's order and secured an order in their favour. The Padmavars went into a revision before the excise minister, who then upheld the commissioner's order, prompting them to approach the high court.
The high court noted that the revisional authority relied on the commissioner of police's report to conclude that the documents used for transfering licence in favour of Malkanis were not forged, but the report itself was vague, inconclusive and not based on any forensic analysis related to photos, signatures and other material. The bench opined, "While the outcome of (the pending) criminal proceedings will depend upon detailed trial and adjudication of evidence, this court — while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution — is not precluded from forming a prima facie opinion based on material available on record, including original documents and the outcome of administrative inquiries conducted under the Excise Act." Stay updated with the latest city news , Air Quality Index (AQI), and weather updates for major cities like Delhi , Mumbai , Noida , and Bangalore on Times of India .
.
