@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
R.K. Merathia, J.@mdashMr. Das, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, submitted that the Petitioner No. 2 Vivek Pandey was granted
vendor licence in the name of his place of business as ""Baithak Restaurant"", Jamshedpur being licence No. 34/2009-2010. Thereafter, he entered
into partnership with Petitioner No. 1 Avinash Jaiswal and got a partnership firm registered for running the said ""Baithak Restaurant"". Then, an
application was made for insertion of the name of the Petitioner No. 1 also in the licence on which recommendations were made after verification.
But the Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 16.10.2010 as contained in letter No. 1131, rejected the request of the Petitioners saying that there is
no clear provision for insertion of the name of any person as partner in the licence and that, as per Rules 143 and 144 of the Jharkhand Excise
Rules, power to transfer licence is vested with the Deputy Commissioner. He further submitted that according to the said Rules, the Collector who
is the Excise Commissioner in view of Section 2(7) read with Section 7 of the Jharkhand Excise Act, has been vested with the power to
permit/approve transfer/sub-letting of licence to any other person. He also submitted that as per Section 23(2) of the Jharkhand Excise Act, letting
or assignment can be made to another person, only with the approval of the Collector who is the Excise Commissioner. He further submitted that
only the Excise Commissioner is empowered to grant licence and therefore, he has got power to amend / insert the name of the partner in the
licence.
2. Mr. Abhay Prakash, learned Counsel appearing for the State, submitted that in the absence of the counter-affidavit, he is not in a position to
either accept or controvert the statements made in the writ petition or the said submissions made on behalf of the Petitioners. However, supporting
the impugned order, he submitted that there is no provision for insertion of name of the partner in the licence.
3. In my opinion, in view of Section 2(7) read with Section 7 read with Section 23 read with Rules 143 and 144 of Jharkhand Excise Act/Rules,
even letting/assignment/transfer/sub-lease of licence (whether entire or partial) is permissible with the permission/ approval of the Collector who is
the Excise Commissioner. In this case, only insertion of name of the partner, in the licence is requested, which prima facie would not cause
prejudice to the Department or any other person in any manner.
4. In the result, the impugned order dated 16.10.2010 as contained in Letter No. 1131 passed by the Commissioner, Excise, Government of
Jharkhand, Ranchi (Respondent No. 2), is set aside. The matter is remitted back to him to take a fresh decision on the request of the Petitioners.
If, he is satisfied that the Petitioner No. 2 has actually entered into partnership with the Petitioner No. 1, and insertion of the name of the Petitioner
No. 1 in the licence is not prejudicial to the Department or any other person, he will pass necessary order for insertion of the name of the Petitioner
No. 1 in the licence. If however, he is of the opinion that acceptance of the request of the Petitioner No. 2 will cause prejudice to the Department
or any other person, he may refuse such prayer by communicating reasons thereof to the Petitioners. This exercise should be completed within one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.