Rajes Kumar, J. - (1.)BY means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned revisional order dated 12.7.2006 passed by respondent No. 1 (Annexure -11 to the writ petition), appellate order dated 24.4.2006 passed by respondent No. 2 (Annexure -7 to the writ petition) and demand order dated 9.2.1999 passed by the respondent No. 4 (Annexure 6 to the writ petition).

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to credit the entire amount Rs. 11,29,352.00 with 18% penal interest in the advanced duty account of the petitioner if it is deducted during the pendency of the writ petition.

(iii) Issue, any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of (he case.

(iv) Award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.

(2.)BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Company duly incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having it registered office at A -270, Defence Colony, New Delhi and the distillery at Raja Ka Sahaspur, District Moradabad. The distillery is commonly known as "Ajudhia Distillery". The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and sales of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (hereinafter referred to "IMFL") and country liquor. The petitioner has been granted a license in Form P.D 2 for the manufacture of IMFI, and country liquor under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The potable liquor manufactured by the petitioner is subject to excise duty in accordance to the provisions of Section 28 readwith Section 29 of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder and the notifications.
On 28 August, 1998, fire took place in the godown Nos. 5 and 6 of the petitioner at around 2.30 P. M. The petitioner claimed that the information of the aforesaid fire was communicated to the Fire Brigade at Moradabad and Chandausi as well as to the Police Station, Bilari at once. After best efforts the fire could be controlled at 6.00 P.M. with the help of the Fire Brigade. The information of the aforesaid fact was duly forwarded to the Assistant Excise Commissioner, Ajudhia Distillery vide letter dated 28"' August, 1998 and it was informed that due to the lire accident, there has been loss of IMFL/spirit stored in godown Nos. 5 and 6. Copy of the letter dated 31 August, 1998 issued by the Fire Fighting Officer, Chandauli in this regard is Annexure -2 to the writ petition and report of police station, Bilari dated 22 September, 1998 has also been annexed. In reply to the letter No. 447 dated 19 th September, 1998 of the Assistant Excise Commissioner, Ajudhia Distillery, District Excise Officer, Moradabad wrote a letter dated 9 October, 1998 in which Assistant Excise Commissioner was directed that the goods may be quantified in your presence and the same may be kept at a secured place and for the repairing of the godown, permission may be granted. This letter is Annexure 4 to the writ petition. The Excise Commissioner, U.P. also wrote a letter dated 11th November, 1998 to Joint Excise Commissioner, Meerut Zone, Meerut directing him to make a spot inspection and after verification of the balance stock, steps may be taken for the repairing of the damaged godown and necessary action may be taken for the payment of excise duty on the damage 50,663.3 AL, IMFL. Thereafter, the Assistant Excise Commissioner issued a letter/order dated 9"' February, 1999 to the petitioner wherein it is stated that out of total 50,663.3 AL, IMFL was filled in bottles and out of which 22,449.5 AL, IMFL remained balance after lire and balance quantity of 28,233.8 AL was found burnt on which at the rate of 40 percent per AL Rs. 11,29,352/ - is payable towards excise duty. Being aggrieved by the said order, petitioner filed appeal before the Additional Excise Commissioner (Administration) U.P., which has been dismissed on the ground that 28,233.8 AL, IMFL was damaged due to the negligence of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is liable for excise duty on such quantity. Being aggrieved by the order of the Additional Excise Commissioner (Administration) U.P., petitioner filed revision before the State Government. State Government vide impugned order dated 12th July, 2006 dismissed the revision. Revisional authority held that the petitioner was granted license in P.D -2 on the condition that the petitioner would follow all the Rules provided in Excise Manual and the licensee is responsible for all the losses due to the negligence. It has been held that the fire was not as a result of accident, but was the result of negligence.

(3.)HEARD Sri Neeraj Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel.