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

2022 Supreme(AP) 237

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
M/s. Waltair Club - Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
W.P.No.18141 of 2021
Decided on : 29-03-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : N. ASHWANI KUMAR

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles14, 19, 21 and 300-A -- Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 - Rules, 2005 - AP Excise Act, 1968 - Section 31(1)(b) - Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Section 100 (4) - Powers to arrest without warrant, to seize articles liable for confiscation and to make searches – Club - Working Committee Tenure - Grant of license of selling by in-house and condition of license- Case of petitioner is that petitioner Club was established in the year 1883 for providing recreational and other facilities to Europeans who were working in East Coast Railways and East Coast Battalion and for other Civilian Officers staying in Visakhapatnam and constructed halls, auditoria, beauty parlour, library, gym, dining hall, restaurant, pub, etc - As a part of its recreational facilities, petitioner Club intended to make available liquor to its members, in a designated consumption area, within the Club premises - Whether petitioner club has been selling liquor to bonafide members or not - Held, Opinion of this Court on this aspect is fortified by decisions of this Court in Yeduru Sreenivasulu Reddy’s case (1st Supra) and Sai Krishna Pidathala’s case (2nd Supra), wherein it is held that at time of seizure, they have to conduct Panchanama/Mediators Report in presence of independent mediators by following procedure prescribed under Section 100 (4) of Code of Criminal Procedure - The respondents ought not to have come to a conclusion that petitioner running bar in club premises without a valid license as already in-house license was granted by competent authority and issuing the license in prescribed format by concerned Superintendent, Prohibition and Excise, is an empty formality though petitioner has to submit a counter part agreement as submitting a counter part agreement is also a just formality - Though this Court has fully agreeing with proposition of law laid down in judgments relied on by learned Government Pleader, in our view, those judgments are not applicable to facts and circumstances of present case - Writ Petition is allowed.

ORDER :

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a “Writ of Mandamus” or any other appropriate writ, with the following order or direction:

A. To declare the action of the Respondent No.6, in registering Crime No.134/2021 dated 11.08.2021 for alleged violation of Rules 10, 20, 35, 36, 37, 42 & 45 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of license of selling by in-house and condition of license) Rules, 2005 ( for short “Rules, 2005), r/w Section 31(1)(b) of AP Excise Act, 1968, as being illegal, arbitrary, ulterior motives, contrary to provisions of A.P. Excise Act, 1968, and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India,

B. To declare the proceedings Rc.No.349/2021/A4 dated 13.08.2021 issued by the Respondent No.4 authorizing and directing the Respondent No.5 to obtain (i) Bye-laws of Petitioner Club, (ii) Working Committee Tenure Particulars, (iii) list of existing club members and their details & (iv) copy of resolution, under garb of investigation in Cr.No.134/2021 dated 11.08.2021 on the file of Respondent No.6 as being illegal, arbitrary and wholly without jurisdiction and in gross violation of the provisions of AP Excise Act, 1968, and in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, C. To declare the action of the Respondents in seizing/sealing the restaurants in the premises of the Petitioner Club under guise of investigation in Cr.No.134/2021 dated 11.08.2021 on the file of Respondent No.6 as being illegal, arbitrary, wholly without jurisdiction, without authority of law and highhanded, and in gross violation of the provisions of AP Excise Act, 1968 and in violation of Article 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India,

D. Consequently to quash Cr.No.134/2021 dated 11.08.2021 on the file of the Respondent No.6, and

E. Consequential direction to set aside the impugned proceedings Rc.No.349/2021/A4 dated 13.08.2021 issued by the Respondent No.4 authorizing and directing the Respondent No.5 to obtain (i) Bye-laws of Petitioner Club, (ii) Working Committee Tenure Particulars, (iii) list of existing club members and their details & (iv) copy of resolution of the Petitioner Club.

2) The Respondent No.4 filed counter-affidavit.

3) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner Club was established in the year 1883 for providing recreational and other facilities to Europeans who were working in East Coast Railways and East Coast Battalion and for other Civilian Officers staying in Visakhapatnam and constructed halls, auditoria, beauty parlour, library, gym, dining hall, restaurant, pub, etc. As a part of its recreational facilities, the petitioner Club intended to make available liquor to its members, in a designated consumption area, within the Club premises, for which the petitioner obtained license under Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968, r/w Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by in-house and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2005 in Form C-1.

4) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Petitioner Club run a bar “1883” (seating room of 35 persons for service and consumption of Liquor) and three (3) restaurants namely (where no liquor is served), “1883 restaurant” (seating of 60 persons), “AC dining Hall” (seating of 60 persons) and “Waltair Lounge” (seating of 40 persons), situated in the premises of the Petitioner Club. On an application, the Petitioner was granted in-house club license to sell/service liquor, in the designated consumption area i.e., “1883”in Form C-1 (License No.02/2020-21 dated 15.10.2020, issued as under Rule 4(iii) of Rules, 2005), by the Respondent No.3 after payment of Rs.6,00,000/- as license fee, for the lease year commencing from 01.07.2020 to 30.06.2021.

5) It is further submitted that on expiry of the above said license, the Secretary of the Petitioner Club applied for in-house Club license in Form C-1 for the license period 2021-22. The Respondent No.2 examined the said application in detail and after due enquiry, granted

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 Back to top