IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13418 of 2009 Between: M/s. New Anantha Restaurant & Bar, situated at D.No.4-3-121/59 to 2-3-121/64, N.T.R. Chourasta, Hyderabad Road, Vikarabad Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, represented by its one of the Partner R.Venkata Das Goud S/o. Venkatram Goud. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Excise Bhavan, J.N. Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Ranga Reddy District, Excise Bhavan, J.N.Road, Hyderabad. 3 The Superintendent of Proh. & Excise, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, Excise Bhavan, J.N.Road, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SAI RAM GOUD Counsel for the Respondents:AGP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed by Mr.R.Venkata Das Goud, Son of Venkatram Goud, who claims to be one of the partners of M/s.New Anantha Restaurant and Bar at Vikarabad. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that the writ petition ought to have been filed in the individual name of the petitioner instead of in the name of the firm. The grievance of the petitioner is that differences arose between the partners and that petitioner’s representation, dated 03.07.2009 received by respondent No.1 is not being considered before disposal of the application filed by another partner. When there is a dispute among the partners, it is incumbent upon respondent No.1 to consider whether the objections, if any, raised by one or more partners of a partnership firm for renewal of license are sustainable in law or not. If the objections so raised, are found to be legal and valid, respondent No.1 cannot renew the license at the instance of other partners. Conversely, if he does not find any merit in such objections, he can direct renewal of license. As the petitioner’s grievance is innocuous, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to consider his objections before deciding on the application for renewal of Form 2-B license in favour of M/s.New Anantha Restaurant and Bar. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.17428 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 7th JULY, 2009. kvni