##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.34578 of 2024

DATE: 06.04.2026

Between:

Mr. Akula Satish.

...Petitioner AND

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

Prohibition and Excise Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 7 others.

…Respondents

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct the official respondents to take against unofficial respondents for running illegal pubs: The Golden barrel pub situated Besides TVS showroom Miyapur Road, Bachupally and Taqila pub at Rudra Altis

2

Building Plot No.61 Miyapur Road, Besides Pista House, Bachupally without any permissions is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and in violation of the provisions under Municipal laws and Excise laws, Consequently direct the official respondents to conduct detailed enquiry and to take action against unofficial

respondent …”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing

for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, based on the written instructions of the District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Medchal–Malkajgiri District, vide Memo No. B1/Spl/2026 dated 13.03.2026, submits that, insofar as the grievance of the petitioner that respondent Nos. 7 and 8, viz., (i) Golden Barrel Pub and (ii) Taqila Pub, are running without any license is concerned, the written instructions demonstrate that both establishments have been functioning with valid licenses issued under Rules 4 and 6 of the Telangana Excise (Grant of License for Selling by Bar and

3

Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 2005” for brevity). The allegations made in the representation are, therefore, not substantiated. In this view, she submits that, since the said establishments are operating in consonance with Rules 4 and 6 of the Rules, 2005, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition under a misconception. Stating

so, she seeks to dismiss the writ petition.

4. While conceding to the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to work out his remedies in accordance with law. Stating so, he would seek to pass appropriate

orders.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, and upon perusing the material on record, including the written instructions of the District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Medchal–Malkajgiri District, which are taken on record, and

4

without going into the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the writ petition no longer survives. It is needless to mention that the petitioner is at liberty to work out his

remedies in accordance with law, if any grievance still subsists.

6. With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________

JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

06.04.2026 PSW