In Brief
Retail liquor licence holders challenged the sealing of their shops and ex-parte stay orders by the State Excise Commissioner, raising grounds of procedural violation and personal bias. The High Court quashed the impugned orders but made adverse remarks against the Commissioner. On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to not transfer the case but expunged the personal remarks as unnecessary. The Court held that a plea of bias requires substantial material and cannot rest on the mere fact of adverse ex-parte orders. The Court also quashed the High Court's anticipatory direction restraining implementation of future adverse orders, holding that courts cannot preempt orders not yet passed. The pending appeals remain to be decided on merits by the Commissioner without influence from these observations.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.