IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J.
D. RAMAKRISHNA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH - Respondent
Writ Petition Nos. 1359 of 2018
Decided on : 08-02-2018
A.P. Excise Act, 1968 - Section 31 - Writ Petition - Suspension of the licence - Prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4th respondent-Excise Superintendent cum licensing authority issued in RC. as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the Act, 1968 and the rules made thereunder and in violation of principles of natural justice, consequently set aside the proceedings and be pleased to pass such other or further orders - Held, There is no any illegality or arbitrariness or unconstitutionality or anything contrary to the Act, 1968 and the rules made thereunder referred supra and also no any violation of principles of natural justice to set aside the proceedings, but for the said proceedings of suspension pending enquiry cannot be indefinite and once there are grave allegations even based on confession interim suspension - The very order is an order of suspension pending enquiry but as if a final order by also mentioning there is a right of appeal to the Deputy Commissioner and the same without show cause notice and violation of principles of natural justice being per se illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Act, 1968 and the rules made and the pronouncements thereunder referred supra and is thereby liable to be set aside by giving liberty to the respondents to issue show cause notice and from submission of explanation and on hearing by giving reasons pass final orders - Ordered accordingly.
B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J.
1. All the petitioners in the 19 writ petitions respectively are the licensees of the wine shops in different parts of the State of Andhra Pradesh. Impugning the proceedings of suspension of the licence respectively by the Superintendent Prohibition & Excise of the concerned Districts, these writ petitions are filed.
2(a). So far as W.P.No.1359 of 2018 concerned the same is filed by one Sri D.Ramakrishna of M/s.D.J.Wines, GS.No. EG/128/2017-19, Guripudi Village, Karapa Mandal, East Godavari District, and the respondent Nos.1 to 5 are State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise-II) Dept., rep. by its Principal Secretary, The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Vijayawada, The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Kakinada, The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Kakinada and the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Tallarevu, East Godavari District. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4th respondent-Excise Superintendent cum licensing authority issued in RC.No.PESKKD-IMLOO the/3/2018-JA-A3(P&E)-KKDEG- 1 dated 12.01.2018 and the consequential show cause notice issued in RC.No.PESKKD-IMLOO the/3/2018-JA-A3(P&E)-KKD-EG-1 dated 12.01.2018 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and the rules made thereunder and in violation of principles of natural justice, consequently set aside the proceedings and be pleased to pass such other or further orders.
2(b). So far as W.P.No.1377 of 2018 concerned the same is filed by one Sri Pullaiah of M/s. Guru Wines, Muddanur Village and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, and the respondent Nos.1 to 5 are State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise-II) Dept., rep. by its Principal Secretary, The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Vijayawada, The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, YSR Kadapa, The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, YSR Kadapa, and the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Muddanur, YSR Kadapa District. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4th respondent-Excise Superintendent cum licensing authority issued in Rc.No.A4/340/2017 dated 08.01.2018 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and the rules made thereunder and in violation of principles of natural justice, consequently set aside the proceedings and be pleased to pass such other or further orders.
2(c). So far as W.P.No.1405 of 2018 concerned the same filed by one Sri Ede Srinivasa Rao of M/s. Raghu Wines, Arthamuru Village, Bantumilli Mandal, Krishna District, and the respondent Nos.1 to 5 are State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise) Dept., rep. by its Principal Secretary, The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Vijayawada, The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Vijayawada, The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Machilipatnam, and the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Bantumilli, Krishna District. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4th respondent-Excise Superintendent cum licensing authority issued in RC.No.228/2017/B4 dated 17.01.2018 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to A.P. Excise Act, 1968 and the rules made thereunder and in violation of principles of natural justice, consequently set aside the proceedings and be pleased to pass such other or further orders.
2(d). So far as W.P.No.1427 of 2018 concerned the same filed by one Sri K. Venkataramaiah of M/s. Swagath Wines, Machavaram Mandal, Guntur District, and the respondent Nos.1 to 5 are State of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise-II) Dept., rep. by its Principal Secretary, The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Vijayawada, The Deputy Commissioner of
Har Shankar Vs. Dy. E&T. Commissioner
K.Srinivasa Reddy Vs. Superintendent, Prohibition And Excise
Khoday Distilleries Vs. State of Karnataka
Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. the CEC, New Delhi
Satyanna Goud Vs. Excise Superintendent, Mahboobnagar
Sree Devi Wines Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Excise, Kakinada
Sri Narsimha Wines Vs. Prohibition and Excise
Sukhwinder Pal Bipin Kumar Vs. State of Punjab
Superintendent, Prohibition & Excise Vs. Krishna Wines
V.P. Thimmaiah Vs. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Government of AP, Hyderabad
Venkateswara Wines Vs. Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.