SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 1154

S. B. SINHA, A. R. LAKSHMANAN
Prohibition And Excise Supdy. A. P. – Appellant
Versus
Toddy Tappers Coop. Society, Marredpally – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

What is the legality and retrospectives effect of Rule 24 as amended in the A.P. Excise Rules, 1969, particularly its retrospective application and its impact on suspensions/show-cause notices? What is the proper interpretation of Section 72(3) and (4) of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968 regarding retrospective rule making and prior laying before the Legislature? What are the rights and permissible procedures for sending toddy samples to independent laboratories for analysis under Rule 24 and its amended form, and does such testing affect license suspension actions?

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the legality and retrospectives effect of Rule 24 as amended in the A.P. Excise Rules, 1969, particularly its retrospective application and its impact on suspensions/show-cause notices?

What is the proper interpretation of Section 72(3) and (4) of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968 regarding retrospective rule making and prior laying before the Legislature?

What are the rights and permissible procedures for sending toddy samples to independent laboratories for analysis under Rule 24 and its amended form, and does such testing affect license suspension actions?


JUDGMENT

Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, J.-These appeals were filed by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent of various divisions and districts of Andhra Pradesh against the final judgment dated 10.01.2003 of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition Nos. 19186 and 21096 of 2002 etc. batch wherein the High Court allowed the writ petitions filed by the respondents herein, who are having licenses for selling toddy at their respective shops, striking down the amended Rule 24 of the A.P. Excise (Arrack and Toddy Licenses General Conditions) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the A.P. Excise Rules ) of its retrospective effect. The High Court held it as prospective in its operation and quashed the suspension of licenses and show-cause notices issued for cancellation with regard to the various toddy shops of the respondents in this batch of appeals.

2. The facts leading to these appeals being practically are the same, they are being disposed of by this common judgment by consent of parties.

3. The short facts leading to the filing of these appeals are as under:-

The respondents herein are all members of Toddy Tappers Cooperative Societies. On 26.08.2002, 42 shops were raid








































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top