Kola Ravi Kiran v. The State of Telangna

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the impugned proceedings bearing No. Cr.No.10351 20071 P &ElB2 daled 0410312025 issued by the Respondent No. 3 in canceling the license of the Petitioner s Bar and Restaurant of the petitioner having its name and style M/s. Bhargavi Restaurant and Bar, L.B. Nagar, Warangal at premises bearing H.No. 11-23-942,943 and 943/1 , L.B. Nagar, Warangal without considering the explanation daled 2210212025 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violation of principles of natural justice and set-aside the same consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to make entire dues and restore the 28 license of M/s Bhargavi Rest. and Bar, L.B Nagar, Warangal 7 lA NO: 1 oF 2025 Petition under Section 'r 5'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the p"iition, in" iign corrt ,uv o" pr"-"!io to :y:p-u.!q the impugned orders bearing No. Cr. No.1O3S/2oOilpae7AZ irt"o -No. 0410312025 issued by the Respondent 3 whire directing tne reffiJerits to 3lloy^.["__pglitioner to pay- dues to the department and restore the license No.03/2007-08 Dt.2g I 1 1 /2022 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. NAKKA MAHESH counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Gp FoR pRoHlBlfloN AND ExclsE The Court made the following: ORDER 7 ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI T. VINOD KUMAR 'USTICE Writ Petiti n No. 11 52 of 2O 25 i I . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for prohibition and Excise appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he has been granted 28 Bar licence during the year 2022_2023 under the provisions of the Telangana Excise Act, 1968 (for short, .the Act,) read with the Telangana Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules, 2005 (for short ,the Rules,); and that the said Iicence was not renewed for subsequent excise years 2023_2024 and 2024-2025.

3. Petitioner further contends that though the licence granted in his favour was not renewed after the expiry of excise year ZOZZ_2023, the 3d respondent has issued a show cause notice dt.1g.OZ.2O2S seeking to cancel the licence issued in favour of the petitioner; that the petitioner had submitted explanation on 22.02.2025; and that the respondents_ authorities without considering the aforesaid expranation have issued the impugned canceilation proceedings dt.04.03.2025, which action of the responde/-authorities it is contended as highly illegal and arbitrary. I I i 2 -\

4. Per contra, rearned Government preader for prohibition and Excise appearing on beharf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 wourd submit that the petitioner did not take part in the subsequent excise year auctions held during the year 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 and as such, the licehce granted in his favour during the year 2022-2023 stood rapsed by virtue of operation of Rule t0(4) of the Rules.

5. Learned Government preader further submits that by virtue of the provisions of the Act and the Rures, any ricence granted is only valid for one year and the same wourd stand rapsed on expiry of the excise year unless and until extended by a G.O. 6 I have taken note of the respective contentions urged

7. This Court has come across cases where the authorities having issued show cause notices even though the ricence granted is onry for a period of one year and the same having stood expired at the end of the excrse year.

8. The present writ petition is one such case where though the ricence granted in favour of the petitioner had expired on 30.09.2023, the respondents-authorities by issuing show cause notice dt.1g.02.2025 had called upon the petitioner to submit expranation as to why his ricence should not be cancelled. \ 3

9. Firstly, it is to be noted that the notice can be issued only if the licence granted is in force/vogue. Admittedly, the licence granted in favour of the petitioner expired on 30.09.2023. Once, the. licence having expired by.efflux of time as per the conditions of licence granted in favour of the petitioner, there was no need/necessity for the 3'd respondent to issue such notice calling upon the petitioner to submit explanation as to why licence should not be cancelled which is not even in force on the day when the authority had issued the said notice.

10. Taking advantage of issuance of such notice by the 3'd respondent, the petitioner has now filed the present Writ Petition claiming to have submitted explanation and non-consideration of the same by the authority and seeking a direction to the respondents to restore the 28 bar licence expired earlier.

11. The course of action adopted by the 3d respondent authority in I ! issuing notice and the petitioner claiming to have submitted explanation and non-consideration of the same, clearly indicates that the authority intended to create a cause of action for the benefit oF petitioner for him to approach this Court and obtain interim order, even though the licence is I I not subsisting as of date.

12. For the aforesaid reason, this Court is of the view that not only the action of the petitioner in filing the present Writ petition, but also the I 4 action of the respondents-authorities in issuing such kind of notices and proceedings' wourd go to show that the authorities are hand in grove with the 28 licence holder, like the petitioner in the present case. 13. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the present Writ Petition as filed is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs.5,000/_ (Rupees Five Thousand only) payable to the Telangana High Court Advocates, Library. 14. Registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the principal Secretary as well as the Commissioner, prohibition and ,Excise Department, Hyderabad.

15. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. MEM ORANDUM oFC OSTS W.P.N o.110 52 0F 202s [?:!"ffi l"ft 3L']3".',i"""P#'l"G*x, 3;11g.*'g5;;i:tffi !t,;itk'f',:is*j I TOTAL Rs. ps 5,000-00 s,000-00 I To, //TRUE COPYII %3,i#ili,AF3,SfRRX t'--?Lr sEcTtoi! otrrcen ' I}Sir:ffifal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Deparrment. Secretariat, 2 Ihg Commissioner. prol rerangana State. hibition and Excise Depa(ment, Hyderabad, a The President, Telangana High Co,,!!rocates Association at Hyderabac, 4 5 One CC to SRl. NAKKA MAHESH Advocate TOPUCI Two CCs to GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE 'High Telangana. [OUT] Court for the State of Two CD CoPies 6 KKS LS w \ HIGH COURT DATED:1 510412025 t t //s' /,1"a I c \\. ,$ ORDER WP.No.11052 of 2025 \\ lr, + olt; t :/ I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS 6l /a {