Karnataka High Court
Reliance Retail Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 25 February, 2014
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
WP.6552/2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
W.P.No.6552/2014 (Excise-)
BETWEEN
RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED
NO.62/2, 5TH FLOOR,
RICHMOND ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 025.
REP BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
MR.D.Y.MURALIDHARA RAO. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri.AJOY KUMAR PATIL, ADV.)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR.BR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE IN KARNATAKA
TTMC-SHANTINAGAR
K.H.ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 027.
3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
BENGALURU (EAST),
NO.247, 13TH CROSS,
CMH ROAD, HAL 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU-560 038.
4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
BENGALURU (WEST),
WP.6552/2014
2
NO.22, POORNIMA TALKIES BUILDING,
J.C.ROAD CROSS,
BENGALURU-560 027. ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri.I.THARANATH POOJARI, AGA FOR R1-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2
TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER
AT ANN-H DATED 23.9.2013 AND AT ANN-J DATED 23.9.2013 AND
PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS THEREON AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 engaged in the activity of retail sale of agricultural products and fast moving consumer goods.
2. Petitioner has obtained CL-2 licences for carrying retail vending of liquor at two places of business one in Whitefield and another at Bannerghatta Main Road in Bengaluru. Licences obtained are in the name of Reliance Fresh Limited for the Excise Year 2013-14. Now the name of the petitioner - Company has been changed from 'Reliance Fresh Limited' to 'Reliance Retail Limited'. WP.6552/2014 3
3. Pursuant to the change brought about in the name of the petitioner - Company, it has submitted representations dated 23.09.2013 vide Annexures-H & J addressed to the Deputy Commissioner of Excise, Bangalore East and Bangalore West, Bangalore, seeking for recording the changed name of the Company in the licences, so as to enable the petitioner - Company to continue the transactions under the changed name.
4. The grievance now made by the petitioner is that the respondent authorities instead of mentioning the changed name of the petitioner - Company in the two CL-2 Licences issued to the petitioner, have orally called upon the petitioner to pay transfer fee in terms of Rule 17B of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967 (for short, 'the Rules').
5. The main contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no transfer of licences and what is requested by the petitioner is for recording the changed name of the Company from 'Reliance Fresh WP.6552/2014 4 Limited' to 'Reliance Retail Limited' in CL-2 Licences which will not entail liability to pay the transfer fee as contemplated under Rule 17-B of the Rules.
6. In fact, this Court in W.P.No.17393/2012 & connected cases disposed of 19.07.2012 has held that unless there is change brought about in the management by divesting the control of the Company/firm from its existing partners to the new persons inducted, question of fastening the liability to pay transfer fee under Rule 17-B of the Rules would not arise. In the instant case, according to the petitioner, there is not even any change in the constitution of the Board of Directors of the Company, let alone bringing about change in the control and management of the Company by transferring it in favour of any third party. In such circumstances, it is needless to observe that the respondent - authorities have to apply their mind to the facts and circumstances of the case as pleaded in the representations submitted by the petitioner
- Company and take immediate action as expeditiously as possible for recording the changed name of the petitioner- WP.6552/2014 5 Company in the CL-2 Licences issued to the petitioner in accordance with law.
7. It is open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association of the Company as it stood earlier and as it stands now after its name has been changed to satisfy the authorities that there is no change brought about in the Management of the Company.
8. Respondents are directed to consider the representations within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The transactions carried on by the petitioner in the changed name of the Company will be subject to the orders passed by the authorities as directed above. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE PKS