Telangana High Court
Mr. Esam Srinu, vs The Government Of Telangana., on 13 June, 2022
Author: T.Vinod Kumar
Bench: T.Vinod Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY,
TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN
:PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WP .NO: 18374 of 2014
Between:
Mr. Esam Srinu, S/o Papaiah,
Aged 24 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No. 1-570,
Jaggaiahgudem Village, Gundala Mandal, Khammam District.
..... Petitioner
AND
1 The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue
(Excise) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.
2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Telangana, Nampally,
Hyderabad.
3 The Collector and District Magistrate, Khammam District, Khammam.
4 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, H.No: 4-2-461, Police
Housing Colony, Rotary Nagar, Khammam-507002.
.....Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be
pleased to issue a Writ Order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus
declaring the action of the respondents in not issuing the license to sell Indian
made foreign liqueur & Foreign Liquor by shop under rule 5 of the Andhra
Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of selling by shop and conditions of license)
Rules, 2012 in respect of shop No. 73 at Tekalapalli village and Mandal,
Khammam District, pursuant to Gazette No. A4/07/2014 dated 14-06-2014,
even after declaring the petitioner as successful Applicant to run A4 shop by the
3rd Respondent and despite completing the formalities enumerated in Gazette,
dated 14-06-2014 and consequently direct the 4th Respondent to issue license
to the Petitioner for Gazette Shop No.73, A4 Tekalapalli village and Mandal,
Khammam District.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Syed Lateef,
Advocate for the Petitioner and the learned Advocate General appearing on
behalf of the Respondents, the Court made the following
ORDER:
The petitioner claims to be a resident of Jaggaiahgudem Village, Gundala Mandal in Khammam District. It is the assertion of the petitioner that his village is included in the notified Scheduled Area of Khammam District.
This Court while dealing with Writ Petition No. 17563 of 2014 and batch, on 27.06.2014, has passed a detailed order, the operative portion of which reads as under:
" I have therefore, no hesitation to suspend the operation of the notification issued on 14.06.2014 by the Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Khammam and Kothagudem units respectively. This suspension of the notification would apply in respect of such Gram Panchayat/Gram Sabha areas where similar resolutions are passed like in the instant case. Therefore, the respective Superintendents of Prohibition & Excise, Khammam and Kothagudem are directed to verify by themselves all the Gram Panchayat/Gram Sabha areas situate in the Scheduled Areas and in case, a similar resolution is passed, immediately notify on the office notice board that they are withdrawing the said Gram Panchayat / Gram Sabha area from the notification issued on 14.06.2014. This measure is adopted to prevent all the Gram Panchayats and Gram Sabhas queuing up before this Court for this very relief.
The Excise Superintendents will ensure that the resolutions passed by the respective Gram Panchayats/Gram Sabhas are in conformity with the quorum of attendance and only in respect of such resolutions, which are passed then alone, the necessary action may be taken based thereon."
Now the grievance of the petitioner herein is that the 4th respondent is not issuing A4 licence on the ground that the entire Notification No. A4/07/2014, dated 14.06.2014 has been suspended by this Court.
Today, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State of Telangana would point out that the respondents in the above batch of cases have understood that the entire operation of the notification issued by the Superintendents of Prohibition & Excise, Khammam and Kothagudem respectively has been stayed by this Court.
It is therefore, clarified that the orders passed by this Court earlier are confined only to the scheduled areas falling within Bhadrachalam Revenue Division and to such other scheduled areas where specific consent from Gram Sabha / Gram Panchayat has not been obtained.
The respondents are therefore, directed to act accordingly.
Post the Writ Petition after four weeks.
Counter-affidavit to be filed in the meantime.
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1 The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Excise) Department, Government of Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Telangana, Nampally, Hyderabad.
3 The Collector and District Magistrate, Khammam District, Khammam. 4 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, H.No: 4-2-461, Police Housing Colony, Rotary Nagar, Khammam-507002. (Addressees 1 to 4 BY RPAD) 5 One CC to Sri Syed Lateef, Advocate (OPUC) 6 Two CCs to the Advocate General (Telangana), High Court, Hyderabad.
(OUT) 7 Two CCs to the G.P. for Proh. & Excise, High Court, Hyderabad. (OUT) 8 One spare copy.
nnr HIGH COURT NRR,J DATED: 8-7-2014 NOTE: Post after four weeks ORDER W.P.NO. 18374 OF 2014 DIRECTION HIGH COURT Nnr Date of Drafting : 10-7-2014 NRR,J DATED: 8-7-2014 NOTE: Post after four weeks ORDER W.P.NO. 18374 OF 2014 DIRECTION