SMT. LEELAVATHI v. SHETTY
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE, EQUITY, ISSUE A WRIT, DIRECTION
Outcome
Dismissed
1's appeal is dismissed on the premise
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 1010. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16002 WP No. 108429 of 2025 HC-KAR
Judgment
1. SMT. LEELAVATHI V. SHETTY W/O LATE VISHWANATH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, DOOR NO.HIG 98 STALL NO.53, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580 025.
2. RAJENDRA V. SHETTY S/O LATE VISHWANATH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, DOOR NO.HIG 98 STALL NO.53, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580 025.
3. SURYAKUMAR @ HARISH S/O LATE VISHWANATHA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT: NO.232, BENJIMAN HOUSE, 1ST FLOOR, DVG ROAD, NEAR SHANTINAGAR MARKET, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 016.
4. AJAY S/O VISHWANATHA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, DOOR NO.HIG 98 STALL NO.53, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580 025.
5. SMT. DEEPA D/O VISHWANATHA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, PRADHANAGAR, OPP. KEB SUBSTATION HEROOR BRAHMAVAR, UDUPI, TQ. AND DIST. UDAPI-576 213. CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16002 WP No. 108429 of 2025 HC-KAR
6. SMT. VIDYA D/O VISHWANATHA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO.41, SRINAGAR KARWAR, HUBBALLI-580 024. (BY SRI. MAHANTESH R. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, 2ND FLOOR, NO.249/E, BENGALURU-560 001.
THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, 2ND FLOOR, TTMC A BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR, DOUBLE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 027.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE DEPARTMENT, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD-580 025. (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA) … PETITIONERS … RESPONDENTS ISSUED CIRCULAR
18.08.2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR AN ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH IN DATED THE 2ND NO.ECI/IML/NAVIKARANA/42/2020-21 RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.07.2022 MADE IN APPEAL NO.ECS/68/APP/2019 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-B, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ISSUE A WRIT OR AN ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE DECIDE THE PETITIONER’S APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER AND RENEWAL OF CL-2 LICENSE IN FAVOR OF ALL LEGAL HEIRS IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 17A OF KARNATAKA EXCISE LICENSE GENERAL CONDITION RULES, 1967 WITHIN A SPECIFIED TIME FRAME. THE BY THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16002 WP No. 108429 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
2. This petition is filed to issue a direction to quash the Circular dated 18.08.2025 marked at Annexure-A and the order dated 07.07.2022 passed in Appeal No.ECS/68/APP/2019.
3. In terms of Annexure-A dated 18.08.2025, the Commissioner of Excise has issued instructions to the officers of the Excise Department not to consider any application for renewal of CL-2, CL-9 and CL-11C licences till further orders.
In terms of Annexure-B, the appeal filed by petitioner No.1 is dismissed rejecting his claim seeking renewal of CL-11 license.
Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents would submit that prayer to question Annexure-A has become infructuous as Annexure-A was a temporary - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16002 WP No. 108429 of 2025 HC-KAR measure till the State Government issued a Notification amending the applicable Excise rules and in terms of Notification dated 03.11.2025, the Rules have been amended. It is further submitted that as per the amended Rules, the petitioners are not eligible for renewal of license.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners No.2 to 6 have filed the application for renewal along with the petitioner No.1 and same has not been considered and only application filed by petitioner No.1 filed was rejected.
Operative part
Petitioner No.1's appeal is dismissed on the premise that the other legal heirs of the original license holder have not joined the petitioner No.1 for seeking renewal.
The Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records.
The Order at Annexure-A dated 18.08.2025 has spent its life as the Notification is issued on 03.11.2025 notifying the amended Rules.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16002 WP No. 108429 of 2025 HC-KAR
It is stated that petitioners No.2 to 6 have so far not filed any application seeking renewal of licence. In case the application is filed by the petitioners No.2 to 6, the same shall be considered in accordance with the applicable rules.
It is made clear that the Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the claim of either of the parties.
All contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 60
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: 1's appeal is dismissed on the premise
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.