Requirement of providing opportunity of hearing has to be complied.

On 10.10.2013, at about 09.30 a.m., the Prohibition & Excise Inspector of Enforcement, Ranga Reddy along with the staff and panchas appears to have inspected the Toddy Cooperative Society shop run by the writ petitioner herein. From the suspension order passed by the Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Mahaboobnagar, dated 03.02.2014, I gather that the inspecting party found one person conducting toddy sales in the shop and their enquiries disclosed that the name of that person is Sri G. Yadaiah, S/o Mogulaiah, R/o Burhanpur Village and that individual has also stated that he is selling the toddy on behalf of the licence holder. The person, Sri G. Yadaiah, who was conducting sales, has also shown a copy of the licence bearing No. 02 of 2007, dated 01.10.2007 which was valid up to 30.09.2017. After verifying the boundaries of the shop and finding it tallying with those mentioned in the licence, the officers collected small quantity of toddy from each bottle into a clean plastic bucket and then took 5 ml. of the same into a clean test tube and tested the product sold there with prescribed chemicals in the presence of the panchas. The chemical test carried out by the inspecting officials has revealed that the product is free from adulteration of ‘Chloral Hydrate’. However, on suspicion, the inspecting officers have drawn three samples of toddy under the cover of a panchnama and handed over the same to the Station House Officer, Kodangal Police Station, for taking further action in the matter. The Station House Officer, Kodangal Police Station registered a case in P.C.R.No. 984/2013-14 on 10.10.2013 under Rule 27(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence to Sell Toddy, Conditions of Licenses Tapping of Excise Trees) Rules, 2007 against the President of the TCS toddy shop and produced the case papers and property before the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kodangal, with a request to send one of the samples to the Government Chemical Examiner for Prohibition & Excise, Regional Prohibition and Excise Laboratory, Hyderabad for analysis and report. After receiving the chemical analysis report from the Regional Prohibition & Excise Laboratory, Hyderabad, the Station House Officer, Kodangal Police Station submitted a report on 07.01.2014 informing that the finding of the laboratory revealed that the same is the fermented toddy adulterated with ‘Alprozalam’. Hence, the Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Mahaboobnagar passed the impugned order on 03.02.2014, exercising the power available to him under Section 31(1)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968, suspending the licence of the writ petitioner, with immediate effect pending enquiry, in public interest. It is this order dated 03.02.2014, which is challenged in this Writ Petition.

Heard Dr. K. Lakshmi Narasimha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Excise.

Dr. Narasimha has raised various contentions including the contention that prior to passing this order on 03.02.2014, the Excise Superintendent has not put the petitioner on notice at all, whereas Section 31 of the Act makes it abundantly clear that no licence shall be cancelled or suspended unless the holder thereof is given an opportunity of making his representation against the action proposed. Hence, Dr. Narasimha would contend that contrary to the specific mandate contained in Section 31 of the Act, the Prohibition & Excise Superintendent has not provided any such opportunity before the licence of the writ petitioner is suspended, hence, for that very reason, the impugned order dated 03.02.2014 shall be treated as illegal and deserves to be set aside. Dr. Lakshmi Narasimha has also placed reliance upon various judgments rendered by this Court including the one rendered in K. Srinivasa Reddy v. Superintendent, Prohibition & Excise (2002 (1) ALT 108 (D.B.), wherein this Court held that where there is no opportunity provided to the licence-holder before pas