The licensing authority cannot suspend a license in a routine way or as a matter of course. The licensing authority must exercise its discretion reasonably, bona fide, and without negligence, considering the circumstances of the case.

S. PARVATHA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE Petitioners in these four Writ petitions question the order bearing Rc. No. B2/7501/93 dated 16-2-1994 of the 1st respondent herein i. e. the Excise superintendent, Mahabubnagar, whereunder the T. F. T licences of the petitioners among others have been suspended.

( 2 ) AS the facts and questions arising are more or less common, these writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order.

( 3 ) THE three petitioners (1, 2 and 3) in writ Petition No. 2728 of 1994 are T. F. T. licence holders for counters Nos. 15,16 and 17 respectively in respect of Kishtareddipet village toddy shop which is under T. F. T. Scheme and their licences are for a period of 5 yearsfrom 1-10-1992 to 30-9-1997.

( 4 ) IN the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, these facts are admitted. But it is further stated that one Masanna Goud son of Chandraiah holds T. F. T. licence in respect of Counter No. 14 of the said T. F. T shophe is not before this court in any of the writ petitions.

( 5 ) THE two petitioners (1 and 2) in writ Petition Nos. 2973 are the T. F. T. licence holders in respect of Counter Nos. 7 and 9 of rangapur village toddy shop which is also under the T. F. T. Scheme. Though in the affidavit of Madhusudan Goud, the 2nd petitioner in the writ petition it is stated that the licence of the petitioners have been granted for a period of 5 years from 1-10-1991 to 30-9-1996, in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, it is stated that only the 1 st petitioner in respect of his Counter No. 7 has been granted licenced from 1-10-1991, or 30-10-1996 and that the 2nd petitioner s licence in respect of Counter no. 9 was granted on 8-10-91993 upto 30-9-1994.

( 6 ) THE petitioners in writ petitions nos. 3692 and 4021 of 1994 are respectively the T. F. T. licence holders in respect of counters Nos. 8 and 6 Rangapur village toddy shop. The licence of the petitioner in writ Petition No. 3692 of 1994 is for the period 30-9-1992 to 30-9-1997 and this is accepted by the 1 st respondent in his counter affidavit. Though the petitioner in writ petition No. 4021 of 1994 claims that his licence is for the period 30-9-1992 to 30-9-1997, in the counter affidavit of the 1st respondent, it is stated that his licence is for the period 1-10-1992 to 30-9-1995.

( 7 ) IT is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2728 of 1994 complained to the Deputy commissioner of Excise at Mahabubnagar (impleaded as the 3rd respondent in that writ petition by order dated 31-3-1994 in wp. M. P. No. 7086 of 1994) that there were several irregularities being committed by certain persons regarding illegal toddy sales and that thereupon he ordered for an immediate and necessary action and that the said complaint was also forwarded on the same day to the office of the 1st respondent and that a copy of the said complaint was also filed before the 1st respondent. A copy of the said complaint is filed along with Writ petition No. 2728 of 1994 and it shows that it was submitted by the three petitioners in that writ petition. The allegations therein are as follows:"but October 1993 some of the existing TFT licence holders (cancelled due to adulteration in 1991-92) like Devanna goud, Mohan Goud, Hanumanthu Goud, china Krishnaiah Goud, Kasanna Goud, kistaiah Goud (Ex-Patel) and some others are selling toddy mixed with chloral hydrate while bringing the toddy from Chelemilla tope. In Chelimella tope the above persons are tapping (200) Sendhi trees illegally without paying any Tree Tax and to Tree owners and also they are doing all irregularities without any licence at kishtareddipet Toddy shop. We represented above facts to the excise Sub-Inspector, Pebbair and Excise inspector, Alampur to stop illegal sales of toddy mixed with chloral hydrate and illegal tapping of Sendhi trees but the E. S. I nor E. I. are not taken any action against the illegal sales and illegal tapping of Sendhi trees. So, we request the Deputy commissi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document