IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 6425 of 2004 Between: Katta Srinivasa Rao S/o Suryanarayana R/o Bondada village Kalla Mandal, West Godavari District Licence of M/s. Sri Wines ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh (Revenue) (Excise II) Department Secretariat, Hyderabad rep by Principal Secrtary 2 the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Andhra Pradesh, nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent West Godavari District at Eluru 4 The Prohibition and Excise Inspector Akiveedu, West Godavari District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 3rd respondent issued in Rc. No. 383/2004/A2 dated 29-3-2004 as illegal arbitrery and contrary to theprovisionsof the A.P. Excise Act andthe rules made thereunder and pass such other or further orders as the Hon'ble Court feels deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances ofthe case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.6425 OF 2004 ORDER: The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted IL-24 Licence No.379/98-99 on 31-3-1998 at the premises bearing No.4-56, Bondada village of Kalla Mandal, West Godavari District under the provisions of APIL & FL Rules 1970 and subsequently, it was shifted to R.S.No.44 of the said village. The said licence was renewed up to 31-3-2004. The licence fee was collected based on the population of said Bondada village as less then ten thousand for the Excise year 2002-03 at Rs.3,00,000/-, for 2003-04 at Rs.3,00,000/- and for part of the year of 2004-05 the licence fee that was collected was at Rs.1,00,000/-. It is stated that just two days before the expire of the part of the licence for 2004-05 that is stated to be expired by 31-3-2004, the impugned notice dated 29-3-2004 has been issued, demanding to pay the balance amount of Rs.,4,50,000/- for the Excise year 2002-03 and 2003- 04 and as the petitioner has already paid the licence fee of Rs.3,00,000/- per annum and differential amount of Rs.1,50,000/- for each years of 2002-03 and 2003-04 amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- was demanded. It is stated that on the alleged counter part agreement, the petitioner undertakes to pay the licence fee as per 2001 census. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that the census figures of 2001 were not at all published during the Excise year 2002-03 and 2003-04, however without issuing any show cause notice and without conducting any enquiry, the impugned demand notice has been issued straight away without giving any reasonable opportunity, which is illegal and unsustainable. I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the legality or validity of the said demand notice, but as the impugned demand notice has been issued without giving any prior notice and without giving any reasonable opportunity, the writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to treat the impugned notice in Rc.No.383/2004/A2 dated 29-3- 2004 as a show cause notice and give reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to submit his explanation. The petitioner shall file his explanation within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on filing such an explanation, the third respondent may consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. If the petitioner failed to file his explanation within the stipulated time, the said demand notice holds good and the respondent may take necessary action in accordance with law. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Date: 14-07-2008. Shr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh (Revenue) (Excise II) Department Secretariat, Hyderabad rep by Principal Secrtary 2 the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Andhra Pradesh, nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent West Godavari District at Eluru 4 The Prohibition and Excise Inspector Akiveedu, West Godavari District 5.2CCs to 6.2CD copies