The petitioner, who was the successful bidder for grant of license to sell Indian made foreign liquor and Foreign liquor at Pentapadu village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District for the current Excise year, which commenced on 01.07.2014, challenges the notice dated 13.08.2014 issued by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, West Godavari, Eluru requiring him to select an alternative premises for grant of regular license.

The case of the petitioner is that after he emerged as successful bidder, he was granted provisional license on 01.07.2014 for the excise year 2014-15 to last up to 30.06.2015. He proposed to establish his A-4 licensed shop at the same premises where similar licensees were granted permission during the excise year 2012-13 and 2013-14. In view of the impugned notice required him to select another premises, he challenges the same in this writ petition.

Heard Sri O.Manoher Reddy, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri Moola Vijay Bhaskar, the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise (Government of Andhra Pradesh) for the respondents.

It is contended by Sri O.Manoher Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the premises selected by the writ petitioner is the same premises where the earlier licensees for the years 2012-13 and 2013-14 have run their outlets of Indian made foreign liquor and Foreign liquor. Further, it is contended that when once the premises was found to be suitable for carrying on the business, there is no power that is left behind in the hands of excise officials to direct the petitioner to relocate his shop elsewhere in the village. It is further contended that the present premises is adjoining the main road in the village, therefore, in such a commercial area there could not have been any sudden objections raised for the petitioner to carry on his business. It is further contended that for extraneous reasons and political considerations, the hostility is shown towards the petitioner from carrying on his business at the present premises. It is further contended that the respondents without having any objective consideration for, have buckled under political pressure of the Honble Minister for Endowments and hence issued the impugned notice. It is finally urged by Sri O.Manoher Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, that when once the suitability of the premises in accordance with the Rule 25 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of selling by shop and conditions of license) Rules, 2012 (henceforth for short referred to as Rules) is ascertained by the Excise department, no further power is retained in the hands of the prohibition and excise Superintendent requiring the petitioner to relocate his shop room elsewhere.

The counter-affidavit filed by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, West Godavari, Eluru has disclosed that the objections for granting license for retail liquor vend at the very same premise where the petitioner has located his shop now, was in fact filed on 28.06.2014, earlier in point of time than the drawal of lots amongst the bidders has been taken up. It is, hence, pleaded that it is futile to contend that the objections for running the liquor vend are forthcoming because the writ petitioner has emerged as the successful bidder.

The objections have been raised by the concerned citizens earlier in point of time to the petitioner emerging as a successful bidder for running the retail vend at Pentapadu village, it then emerges that the objections are not directed against the licensee, but they are directed against the licensed premises, which, is likely to be once again chosen for establishing the liquor vend during the excise year 2014-15. This apart, the objectors have clearly pointed out that because of the license that was granted in the previous years, students, womenfolk etc of the village had to face certain hardships. It is, with a view to avoid recurrence of any such hardships, the objectors have urged t