HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14938 of 2010 Date:14.12.2011 Between: Masjid E.Ahilehadees, Gudiwada, Reptd., by its Secretary-Abdul Hafeez ..... Petitioner And: The Government of A.P., Reptd by Its Commissioner, Excise Department, Hyderabad and five others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: SriVenugopala Rao Pasnooru for Sri T.Janardhana Rao Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 5: AGP for Prohibition and Excise Counsel for Respondent No.6: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.1 to 5 in permitting respondent No.6 to run liquor shop for Ward Nos.10 and 17 at Door.No.5-131 of Bantumilli Road, Gudivada, without considering the petitioner’s representation, dated 22.06.2010, as illegal. The petitioner claims to be a registered mosque. When respondent No.6 proposed to locate his retail liquor shop under A-4 licence in house bearing No.5-131, the petitioner raised an objection, upon which, the Excise officials inspected and found that the said shop is within a distance of 96 meters from the mosque. The petitioner further averred that on account of the fact that the proposed shop was within the prohibited distance of 100 meters, the permission earlier granted in favour of respondent No.6 was cancelled. It is the plea of the petitioner that in order to circumvent the earlier hurdle, respondent No.6 has approached respondent No.4 for granting permission to locate his shop on the rear side of the same building bearing H.No.5-131. The petitioner averred that even from the proposed shop, the distance to the mosque is 100 meters and that therefore, the same falls within the prohibited distance under Rule 27 of A.P.Excise (Grant of licence of selling by bar and conditions of licence) Rules, 2005 (for short ‘the Rules’). Even though notice was served on respondent No.6, he failed to enter appearance. No counter-affidavit is filed by the official respondents. In the light of the grievance of the petitioner, which appears to be a registered mosque, and having regard to the prohibition contained in Rule 27 of the Rules, it is appropriate that respondents Nos.3 to 5 look into the grievance of the petitioner and ascertain whether the premises in which respondent No.6 proposes to run the liquor shop is within the prohibited distance of 100 meters from the petitioner-mosque or not. If it is found that it is within the prohibited distance, the said respondents shall take appropriate action in accordance with law after putting respondent No.6 on notice. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.18827 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 14th December 2011 DR