Orissa High Court
WP(C)/13375/2026 of BALAKISHORE PRASAD JAISWAL Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 14 May 2026
of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.13375 of 2026 Balakishore Prasad Jaiswal …. Petitioner Mr. Biraja Prasanna Das, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Mr. Sanjib Kumar Swain, Addl. Govt. Advocate CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.13375 of 2026
Balakishore Prasad Jaiswal
….
Petitioner
Mr. Biraja Prasanna Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
….
Opposite Parties
Mr. Sanjib Kumar Swain, Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
14.05.2026
01.
1. Non-renewal of license of the petitioner in respect of Sargipalli Main Out Still (OS) shop with branch shops for the Excise Year 2026-27 by the Collector, Sundergarh has compelled the petitioner, an excise privilege holder, to come up before this Court by way of filing this writ petition.
2. It is submitted by Sri Biraja Prasanna Das, learned Advocate for the petitioner that due to objection raised in response to Public Notice No.205 dated 17.01.2026, the Collector has not taken step to renew his license for the Excise Year 2026-27. Despite deposit of statutory fees as required under the Odisha Excise Act, 2008 and Rules framed thereunder, and the Inspector of Excise, Sadar Range, Sundargarh having submitted enquiry report in connection with Gram Sabha Resolution dated 18.02.2026 of Sargipali Gram Panchayat under Lephripada
Block in favour of the petitioner, the authority concerned shows indolence to consider the plight, thereby impinging upon his right to carry on business as conferred under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The relevant portion of the said report runs as follows:
“As per Sec.41 of Odisha Excise Act, 2008 no objections shall ordinarily be entertained for shops continuing in an area for more than three years unless there are special reasons to be recorded in writing.
Besides, it is a fact that the villages of Sargipali G.P. area are I.D. Liquor prone area. In the past so many cases have been detected in these villages.
In the event, the O.S shop at Sargipali will not be allowed to open, the area will be Vacuum area and there is every possibility of inflow of I.D. liquor into the area causing health hazard to consumers of O.S. liquor. On opening of O.S. Shop at Sargipali, Consumers can be able to get genuine O.S. liquor at reasonable price.
Under the above facts and circumstances, the renewal of the Sargipali O.S. shop may be considered as found proper by the Higher quarters as per Law for the interest of Govt. Revenue.”
2.1. Learned Advocate for the petitioner emphasized invocation of Rule 233 of Odisha Excise Rules, 2017, provision of which stands thus:
“233. Common Distillation.— In case any license holder fails to open the Out Still liquor shop in approved location due to serious public objection, then the Collector of the District may recommend and certify special circumstances of the case to the State Government through the Commissioner for proper inquiry for holding common distillation of Out Still liquor in Out Still liquor shops contiguous to the concerned exclusive privilege area:
Provided that the above provision shall only be used in special circumstances and not as a matter of routine.”
2.2. It is submitted by learned Advocate that the Collector has renewed excise license for the year 2026-27 with effect from 01.04.2026 in respect of other similarly circumstanced shops of Balisankara and Kinjirikela. Therefore, he pressed for a direction to the authority concerned to consider and dispose of the representation dated 23.03.2026 of the petitioner, which is asserted to be pending before the Collector, Sundargarh for consideration.
3. Sri Sanjib Kumar Swain, learned Additional Government Advocate did not dispute deposit of statutory fees, as is evident from Annexure-4 series, but submitted that as the representation is stated to be pending before the Collector, Sundargarh, the same can be directed to be disposed of in a time-bound manner.
4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, disposes of the writ petition with direction to the opposite party No.3- Collector, Sundargarh to consider the representation dated 23.03.2026 (Annexure-5) and dispose it off within a period of four weeks from the date of production of the copy of this order by affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Pending Interlocutory Application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman) Judge
Aswini Digitally Signed Signed by: ASWINI KUMAR SETHY Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT (SECY I/C) Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 15-May-2026 15:47:27 Signature Not Verified