IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.18382 of 2010 Between: B.Krishnaiah Goud and others ..... PETITIONER (S) AND Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise) Department, rep. by its Prl. Secretary to Govt., Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.18382 of 2010 ORDER: The main grievance of the petitioners is that the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No.B2/207/ 2009 dated 19.12.2009 directing them to select alternative suitable places for running toddy shops in Balanagar village, is contrary to Rule 8 of the A.P. Excise (Grant of Licence to sell, conditions of Licences and Tapping of Excise Trees) Rules, 2007, as also the stand taken by the 3rd respondent himself in the counter filed in W.P.No.19494 of 2009. Heard Sri S.Girmoji Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise. At their request the writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the stage of admission. It is seen from the material on record that the impugned proceedings was issued on the basis of the orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.19494 of 2009, filed in public interest. Through the impugned proceedings the petitioners herein were directed to select suitable places in Balanagar village and inform the proposed premises within four weeks for shifting the existing licence premises and it is also made clear that the same is being issued as per the directions of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.19494 of 2009 informed to him by the Government Pleader for Prohibition & Excise, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, through letter dated 16.12.2009. It is apparent from the material on record that when the impugned proceedings was placed before the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.19494 of 2009, the Division Bench, by order dated 23.12.2009, disposed of the Writ Petition directing the 2nd respondent therein to take action for closing the shops at the existing place if they are not shifted as per the impugned proceedings. When the respondents were attempting to implement the order passed by the Division Bench in W.P.No.19494 of 2009, the present writ petition is filed. The case of the petitioners is that no notice was issued to them before issuing such proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the petitioners were also parties to the proceedings before the Division Bench. Since the impugned proceedings was issued in the public interest as directed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.19494 of 2009, and since the petitioners were only directed to shift the shops from the existing premises which does not cause any loss to them, no interference is called for and the writ petition is devoid of merits. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ N.V.RAMANA, J. 7th September 2010 CVRK