THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.5795 OF 2010 Dated 22nd March, 2010 Between: The Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society …Petitioner And The Deputy Commissioner and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri M.Damodar Reddy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Prohibition & Excise The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside order dated 20.02.2010 passed by respondent No.1, whereby he confirmed order dated 30.11.2009 passed by respondent No.2. I have heard Sri M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise. On the basis of the inspection of the toddy depot run by the petitioner on 27.08.2009, the seized toddy was sent for chemical analysis. When show cause notice dated 10.12.2009 was issued by respondent No.2, the petitioner filed W.P.No.28862 of 2009, which was disposed of by this Court, by order dated 21.01.2010, in terms of interim order dated 31.12.2009 to the effect that till the report from the second analyst is received, no final order shall be passed. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the said order, respondent No.2 issued proceedings dated 30.11.2009 cancelling the licence of the petitioner though admittedly, the second chemical analysis report on the second sample was not received by him. Respondent No.1, who is the appellate authority, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. At the hearing, it is admitted by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise that respondent No.2 has not received and considered the chemical analysis report on the second sample before cancelling the licence. This action of respondent No.2 is contrary to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.28862 of 2009. In this view of the matter, the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 and the order of respondent No.1 confirming the said order of respondent No.2 are set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the chemical analysis report on the second sample, after calling for objections from the petitioner and after considering the explanation, if any, filed by the petitioner, pass an order afresh. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 22nd March, 2010 vrn