BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.(MD)No.14241 of 2025 & W.M.P(MD)No.10467 of 2025 Kudanthai Kings Club, Rep. by its President S.Senthilnathan, S/o.Saminathan, Old Address:

No.19/449, Ayekulam Road, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

New Address:

No.8B/1241, Perumandi Road, Perumandi, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District - 612 001. ...Petitioner vs.

The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Prohibition and Excise Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. ...Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the proceedings in K.Dis.No.P&E 2(4)/234/2024, dated 02.04.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to renew the FL2 Liquor Licence of the petitioner club.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Silambanan, senior counsel for Mr.T.Bashyam For Respondent : Mr.S.Jayapriya, Government Advocate

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order of the respondent dated 02.04.2025, whereby, the respondent refused to issue FL2 liquor licence to the petitioner club.

2. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, in the present case, the petitioner was running a recreation club at No.19/449, Ayekulam Road, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District, after getting proper FL2 licence from the respondent. The lease period for the club ended in the year 2022. While so, an application for renewal of FL2 licence for the year 2023-2024 was made and licence was also renewed by the respondent. However, the petitioner's application dated 24.03.2025 for renewal of FL2 licence for the year 2025-26 was rejected by citing the reason that rental agreement was not enclosed along with the application. According to the learned senior counsel, the petitioner club has identified new premises at T.S.No.1241, Perumandi Main Road, Perumandi Taluk, Kumbakonam and started construction works for setting up a club along with bar. However, rental agreement was entered subsequently, only on 06.11.2025. Thus according to him, possession was handed over to the petitioner even prior to the rental agreement and on that strength only, the petitioner has made the application for renewal of FL2 licence for the year 2025-26. He would submit that non-production of rental agreement cannot be the sole reason for rejection of licence. In support of his contention, he relied upon paragraph 21 of the Judgment of this Court in W.P.No.34060 of

2018, dated 30.04.2019, which reads as follows:-

"21. Moreover, I find some force in the submission of the petitioner to the effect that the change in location and the consequent elapse of time in identifying the new premises for the shop was the reason for the delay in seeking renewal of licence. Evidently, the shift was not voluntary and the petitioner cannot be blamed for the elapse of time, in the circumstances as I have noticed and narrated above."

3. By referring the above, the learned senior counsel would submit that the petitioner in the above case has not even identified the new premises for the shop. As far as the present petitioner is concerned, the new premises was already identified and construction works were also started. Thus, the present petitioner stands in a better position than the petitioner in the above cited case. Since the case of that petitioner was considered by this Court, the the case of the present petitioner should also be considered. He therefore prayed for allowing this Writ Petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that in the present case, since the rental agreement was not enclosed along with the application for renewal of FL2 licence, the respondent was not in a position to consider the petitioner's application. She would fairly submit that though the petitioner has not submitted the application within the dat