Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
H.K. Sema, Altamas Kabir and L.S. Panta

JUDGMENT

Altamas Kabir, J.

1. Special Leave Petition No. 16505 of 2004 was filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh and its officers in the Excise Department on 23rd June, 2004 against the Judgment and Order passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court on 12th February 2004 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1027 of 1999, which had been filed by Shri R.P. Sharma in his capacity as the sole proprietor of M/s Bimal Paints and Chemical Industries situated at Aligarh in Uttar Pradesh.

2. The writ petitioner in the said writ petition is the holder of a licence in Form FL No. 41 granted under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910 and the rules framed thereunder. The petitioner was aggrieved by the levy of licence fee on the sale of specially denatured spirit to licencees holding licence in Form FL 41 @ 15% ad valorem on the sale made by a distillery/wholesale vendor to FL 41 licencees purportedly under the provisions of the U.P. Licences for the Possession of Denatured Spirit and Specially Denatured Sprit Rules, 1976 as amended from time to time. On behalf of the writ petitioners it was contended that the licence fee levied on a FL 41 licence is neither regulatory nor a compensatory fee because no services are rendered to the licensee which could justify it as a regulatory fee.

3. Although, on behalf of the petitioner reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in State of U.P. v. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd and Anr. MANU/SC/0833/2003 : AIR2003SC4650 , such stand was held to be untenable by the High Court inasmuch as, in the said case it was held that denatured spirit is outside the seisin of the State Legislature which has jurisdiction over only potable alcohol.

4. However, the High Court held the impugned licence fee to be wholly illegal upon observing that in the case before it, the respondents had not claimed that the fee in question was being charged for ensuring that the rectified sprit is not diverted and used for human consumption, but that the fee was being charged for sale/purchase of denatured spirit. The High Court was of the view that having regard to the findings of this Court in Vam Organic's case (supra) imposition of fee on such ground was not acceptable since legislation with regard to denatured spirit was outside the preview of the State Legislative powers. Paragraph 42 of the judgment in Vam Organic's case (supra) has been quoted in its judgment by the Hi........