The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.23386 2011 Date: 27-12-2011 Between: Bagh Singh ..... Petitioner AND 1.The Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, 1st Floor, Apkari Bhavan, Opp. Nampally Exhibition ground, Nampally, Hyderabad .....Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.Murali Narayan Bung Counsel for the respondent: AGP for Prohibition & Excise The Court made the following : Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondent to vacate the ground floor portion of premises bearing No.2-3-658/5 of Amberpet, Hyderabad. On finding that the lease period has expired on 14- 02-2008, the Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition and E x c i s e , Hyderabad, vide his reply notice in Cr.No.B5/328/2011/P&ESs/Ex, dated 08-07-2011, has requested the petitioner to give at least six months’ time to vacate the subject premises. When this Writ Petition came up for hearing before this Court on 12-12-2011, this Court has called upon the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, representing the respondent, to seek instructions from the respondent as to the reasonable time required for vacation of the premises in question. Today, the learned Assistant Government Pleader placed before the Court letter bearing Cr.No.B5/328/2011/P&ESS, dated 24-12- 2011, of the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Secunderabad (FAC), addressed to the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, wherein he has instructed the learned Government Pleader to request the Court for grant of twelve months’ time to vacate the subject premises for identifying Government land, for construction of building for running the Station House Office, at Kachiguda. Sri Murali Narayan Bung, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that, the action of the Excise Department is patently arbitrary because they themselves have requested for six months’ time on 08-07-2011, which has almost expired, and that request for one more year’s time is wholly unreasonable. He further submitted that so far arrears of rents have not been paid. The respondent, being the State functionary, should act fairly and reasonably. When the property belonging to a private party is occupied, the respondent cannot continue therein beyond the lease period. When the petitioner wants his premises back, it is the duty and obligation of the respondent to handover vacant possession of the same within a reasonable time after expiry of the lease period. Admittedly, the lease period expired on 14-02-2008 and the Station House Office is being continued in the subject premises unauthorizedly. In the reply notice, dated 08-07-2011, the Assistant Commissioner has requested for six months’ time, which is also coming to an end in a short while from now. On these admitted facts of the case, I am of the opinion that there is no justification for the respondent to seek further time of one year. However, considering the fact that the Station House Office is located in the demised premises, the respondent is permitted to remain in possession of the subject premises for a further period of six months from today subject to the condition that all arrears payable towards rent to the petitioner shall be cleared within a period of one month from today. If the respondent commits default in clearing the arrears or fails to vacate the subject premises within the time stipulated above, the petitioner shall be free to move this Court for appropriate orders. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed. As a sequel, WPMP.No.28625 of 2011, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 27th December, 2011 LUR