Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Shaik Jilani Saheb,S/O Moulali Saheb vs The Govt Of A.P., Reptd., By The ... on 11 July, 2013
Author: C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
Bench: C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.20151 of 2013
Date:11-07-2013
Shaik Jilani Saheb,S/o Moulali Saheb..... Petitioner
The Govt of A.P., reptd., by the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise
Department, Hyderabad and four others. .....Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri D.Kasim Saheb
Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Prohibition and Excise
Counsel for Respondent No.4: AGP for Revenue
Counsel for Respondent No.5: AGP for Home
<Gist:
>Head Note:
?CITATIONS:
NIL
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in permitting establishment of a retail A-4 liquor shop without reference to the existence of a mosque within the prohibited distance of 100 meters as illegal and arbitrary.
At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, on instructions, submitted that the purported mosque is not a registered one and that, therefore, the prohibition contained in Rule-25 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of selling by Shop and Conditions of License) Rules, 2012 (for short 'the Rules'), has no application.
Rule-25(1) of the Rules postulates location of the liquor shops at least 100 meters away from the places specified therein, including the places of public worship. Sub-clause (a) of explanation to Rule-25(1) of the Rules defines places of public worship as "a temple registered with the Endowment Department, Mosque registered with Wakf Board and Church and includes such other religious institutions, as the State Government may by order specify in this behalf.:
Sri D.Kasim Saheb, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while accepting the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader that the mosque in question has not been registered, has, however, submitted that the same is in the process of registration.
In my opinion, in the face of the unequivocal statutory provision referred to above, an unregistered place of public worship does not fall under Rule-25 of the Rules. Unless and until the mosque in question is registered, the petitioner cannot prevent running of a liquor shop on the ground that the same is situated within the prohibited distance of 100 meters from the mosque in question. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, the W.P.M.Ps, if any, pending are dismissed as infructuous.
__________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 11th July 2013