Q. What are the equivalent citations for C.M. Joseph and Others vs State of Kerala and Others ?

The equivalence citation are(2001) 10 SCC 578 ; LQ/SC/2000/992 ;

C.M. Joseph And Others Vs. State Of Kerala And Others On 11 July, 2000

Q: Q. What was the bench assigned for the case C.M. Joseph and Others vs State of Kerala and Others?

HONBLE JUSTICE B.N. KIRPAL, HONBLE JUSTICE R.P. SETHI

Open iDraf

C.m. Joseph And Others v. State Of Kerala And Others

C.m. Joseph And Others
v.
State Of Kerala And Others

(Supreme Court Of India)

Slps (C) Nos. 8373 of 2000 - 74 of 2000 | 11-07-2000

We have heard learned Senior Counsel at length. We do not agree with the contention that Rule 6(39) of the Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules is bad in law. The said Rule was in existence at the time when the licence was granted to the petitioners and the High Court has rightly observed that the petitioners cannot be allowed to impugn the same. In any event, we do not find any infirmity in the said Rule which states that the licensee shall be bound by all the rules which have been passed under the Abkari Act and which may hereafter be made under the Act or in any law relating to abkari revenue which may hereafter be made. We do not agree with the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the decision of this Court in Food Corpn. of India v. State of Haryana ( 2000 SC 147) supports his contention. In that case this Court had held that the law declared by the High Court had been accepted by the State of Haryana and, therefore, it could not impose any sales tax and therefore, could not consequently demand any interest. In the present case, however, even though some of the licensees had succeeded before the High Court, it is the State which came up before this Court and the decision of the High Court was reversed. Unlike the Food Corpn. of India case ( 2000 SC 147) the State did not accept the finding of the High Court and therefore the decision in Food Corpn. of India case ( 2000 SC 147) will be of no assistance to the petitioners. The special leave petitions are dismissed.

Advocates List

For

Bench List

HON'BLE JUSTICE B.N. KIRPAL

HON'BLE JUSTICE R.P. SETHI

Eq Citation

(2001) 10 SCC 578

LQ/SC/2000/992

HeadNote

Excise — Licence — Abkari Shops (Disposal in Auction) Rules, 1968 — R. 6(39) — Licensee bound by all rules passed under Abkari Act and which may hereafter be made under the Act or in any law relating to abkari revenue which may hereafter be made — Held, said Rule was in existence at the time when licence was granted to petitioners and High Court has rightly observed that petitioners cannot be allowed to impugn the same — Further, no infirmity in said Rule which states that licensee shall be bound by all rules which have been passed under the Act and which may hereafter be made under the Act or in any law relating to abkari revenue which may hereafter be made — Constitution of India, Art. 137