Case Law Details
Delta Corp Limited Vs State of Goa (Bombay High court)
Bombay High Court held that license fee is the price or the consideration for parting with such privilege, which is exclusively owned and controlled by the State Government. Complying with provisions of section 13A of the Goa Public Gambling Act requires payment of the same.
Facts- Under the provisions of the Goa Public Gambling Act, 1976 (the said Act), the Petitioners have been issued licenses to operate offshore and onshore casinos in the State of Goa. These licenses are subject to several terms and conditions, including the payment of Annual Recurring Fees (A.R.F.) prescribed in the statutory notification issued under the said Act.
To combat Covid’19 Pandemic and for public safety and health concerns, lockdown orders were issued by the National and State Governments. For periods between 01.04.2020 and 31.10.2020 and 01.05.2021 and 30.09.2021 (closure periods), most of the business operations, including the Petitioners’ casino operations, were ordered to be closed. By way of concession, the State Government deferred the issue of payments during periods affected by partial or even complete closure of casino operations by not insisting upon immediate payments.
However, upon considering the Petitioners’ representations, the State, by its impugned order dated 25.11.2022 (published in the Official Gazette dated 01.12.2022), directed the Petitioners to pay the arrears of A.R.F. for the closure periods along with penal interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The State’s affidavit shows that this amount comes to ₹ 321,66,66,668/-. The Petitioners, on various grounds, contend that the State should not be permitted to insist upon recovery of arrears towards A.R.F. Hence, the present petitions.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
