IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NOS.7516, 5860, 6011, 6304, 6438, 6579, 9091,9583,9656,9688,9689,9691,9692,9695,9746,14488,14490, 14493,14494,14542,15123,5886,5888,5889,5898,14495 AND 9690 OF 2004. W.P.NO.7516 OF 2004 Between: 1 M/s. New Sridhar Wines, Station Ghanpur [near Railway Gate] rep., by its Licensee Mr.R.Sridhar S/o. Yadagiri, R/o.Hanamkonda, Warangal District. 2 M/s. Sri Rama Wines, Shop H.No.5-12-5, Station Ghanpur, rep., by its Licensee, Mr.T.Raji Reddy S/o. Krishna Reddy, aged 42 years, R/o. Station Ghanpur, Warangal District. 3 M/s. Sri Venkata Ramana Wines, Shop No.4-53-4/D, Station Ghanpur, rep., by its Licensee, Mr. N.V.L.Narasimha Reddy, S/o. Ranga Reddy, R/o. Hanumakonda, Warangal District. 4 M/s. Durga Wines, Shop New House, Station Ghanpur, rep., by its Licensee, Mr. P. Rangith Reddy, S/o. Buchi Reddy, R/o. Malkapur, Warangal District. 5 M/s. Jaya Brandy Shop,House No.2-40,, Station Ghanpur, rep., by its Licensee, Mr. M. Mondaya S/o. Rajaya, R/o. Warangal District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue [Excise-II] Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, A.P., Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Warangal District, Warangal. 4 The Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Station Ghanpur, Warangal. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, declaring the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in RC.No.502/2004/P&E/A1 dated 12.3.2004 and consequential demand notices issued by the 4th respondents in his proceedings in RC.No.18/2004 P& Ex. dated 18.3.2004 to the petitioners are illegal, arbitrary and further declare that the respondents have no authority to demand differential license fee for the excise year 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 from the petitioners and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAVINDER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.5860 OF 2004 Between: M/s. R.R. Wines H. No. 5-2/1 Station Ghanpur rep by Licensee, Mr.R. Ravinder S/o Somaiah, 41 R/o Station Ghanpur, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P., repby Principal Secretary, Revenue (Excise- II) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, A.P. Nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition & Excixe Superintendent, Warangal District, Warangal 4 The prohibition & Excise Inspector Station Ghanpur, Warangal .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction, declaring the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in Rc. No. 502/2004/P&E/A1 dated 12- 03-2004 and consequential demand notice issued by the 4th respondents in his proceedings in Rc. No. 18/2004/P & Ex dt 18-3-2004 to the petitioners are illegal, arbitrary and further declare that the respondents have no authority to demand differential license fee for the excise year 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 from the petitioners. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAVINDER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.6011 OF 2004 Between: 1 R. Sridhar S/o Yadagiri R/o Hanamknda, Warangal District M/s. New Sridhar Wines Station Ghanapur (Near Railway Gate) Warangal District rep by Licencee 2 T. Raji Reddy S/o Krishna Reddy, R/o Station Ghanapur, Warangal District Licencee of M/s. Sri rama Wines Shop No. 5-12-5, Station Ghanapur, Warangal District 3 N.V.L. Narasimha reddy S/o Ranga Reddy R/o Hanamakonda Warangal District Licencee of M/s. Sri Venkataramana wines H. No. 4-53-3/D, Station Ghanapur Warangal District 4 P. Ranjit Reddy S/o Buchi Reddy R/o Malkapur, Warangal District Licencee of M/s. Durga wines, Shop New House Station Ghanapur, Warangal district 5 M. Mondaya S/o Rajaya R/o Warangal Licencee M/s. Jaya Brandy Shop H. No. 2-40, Station Ganapur, Warangal District 6 R. Ravinder S/o Somaiah R/o Station Ganapur, Warangal District Licencee of M/s. R.R. Wines, H. No. 5-2/1, Station Ganapur, Warangal District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh Revenue (ExciseII) Department Secrtariat, Hyderabad rep by Principal Secretary 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Warangal District, Warangal 4 The Prohibition and Excise Inspector Station Ghanapur, Warangal District -----RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in insisting payment of the licence fee at Rs. 1,50,000/- for one quart instead of Rs. 1,00,000/- as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.6304 OF 2004 Between: M/s.Nandini Wines, Yedpally, Nizamabad Dist. Rep. by its Proprietor B.Ram Mohan ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Govt.of A.P.at Nampally,Hyderabad. 2 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings Rc.No.SHO/BDN/IML/04 dated - 3- 2004 as arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.TULASI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.6438 OF 2004 Between: Katta Rajeswara Rao, S/o.Suryanarayana, R/o.Bondada Village Kalla Mandal, West Godavari District. Licencee of M/s Vija Sree Wines, Laxminarasimhapuram. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Govt.of A.P.Revenue (Excise II) Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, W.G.Dist. at Eluru. 4 The Prohibition and Excise Inspector Akiveedu, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may 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.379/2004/A2 dated 29-3-2004 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.6579 OF 2004 Between: Y.Gandhi, S/o Sriramulu,,aged 45 years R/o Velivennu Village, Undrajavaram Mandal, West Godavari District Licencee of M/s Krishna Wines. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise-II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad rep.by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, West Godavari District at Eluru. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 3rd respondent issued in Rc.No.144/2004/B1 dated 29-3-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9091 OF 2004 Between: M. Ganga Reddy, S/o Ganga Ram, Owner of M/s Sreenivasa Wines, Dharpally, R/o Dharpally (V & M), Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Dharpally Mandal, Nizamabad District. 3 The Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise P.S., Bheemgal, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the notice dt. 31-3-2004 issued in RC.NO. E2/284/04 by the 1st Respondent and the proceedings dt 29-4-2004 issued under Revenue Recovery Act Appendix-II, Standing Order No. 41 of A.P. Revenue Recovery Act No 11/1964 by the 3rd Respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and against the principles of natural justice and set aside the same Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH.JANARDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9583 OF 2004 Between: Shaik Mohammad Sharief, S/o.Ajamathali, R/o.Gullapalli Village, Nakirekal Mandal, Guntur Dist. Licencee of M/s Sri Venkateswara Wines. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Govt.of A.P.Revenue (Excise II) Department Secretariat, Hyderabad., rep. by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Proh. & Excise, Andhra Pradesh,Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc.No.189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9656 OF 2004 Between: Pentareddy Inna Reddy, S/o Sowri Reddy, R/o Atchempet village, Guntur District, Licencee of M/s Bala Yesu Wines. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, rep. by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc.No. 189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal , arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9688 OF 2004 Between: Vuyyuru Satyanarayana, S/o Sambasiva Rao, R/o Duggirala Village, Duggirala Mandal, Guntur District. Licencee of M/s Anupama Wines ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad rep.by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc.No.189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9689 OF 2004 Between: Marri Narisi Reddy, S/o. Appi Reddy, R/o. Kondamodu Village Rajupalem Mandal, Guntur District, Licencee of M/s. Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Wines. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II ) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad rep. by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad, 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc.No. 189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under and pass such other or further orders as the Hon'ble Court feels deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9691 OF 2004 Between: Bijjam Hajrat Reddy, S/o. Pedda Yella Reddy, R/o. Nakarikallu Village, Guntur District. Licences of M/s. Kamala Wines ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. rep by its Principal Secretary 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc NO. 189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9692 OF 2004 Between: Penumutchu Latish, S/o Subba Rao, R/o Perecherla Village, Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur District Licencee of M/s Sri Vijaya Durga Wines ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise - II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad rep.by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc.No.189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9695 OF 2004 Between: Pamulapati Sivannarayana S/o Ankamma Rao R/o Perecherla Village Medikonduru Mandal, Guntur District Licencee of M/s. Sri Lakshmi Srinivasa Wines ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh Revenue (ExciseII) Department Secretariat, Hyderabad rep by Principal Secretary 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and excise Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Guntur .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the show cause notice issued by the 3rd respondent in proposing to cancel the petitioner's licence by his proceedings Rc. No. 189/2004/B2 dated 1-6-2004 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.9746 OF 2004 Between: M/s.Venkat Sai Wines rep. by its Proprietor S.Ramana, S/o.Rangaiah, aged about 35 yrs R/o.Thallapally Village, Mancherial Mandal, Adilabad Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Adilabad. 2 Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, A.P.Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ and quash the notice of the 1st respondent in Rc.No.A7/501/2004 dated 20-05-2004, if necessary by declaring that the instructions allegedly issued by the 2nd respondent dated 12-03-2004 are invalid and unsustainable in law and direct the respondents to forbear from recovering any differential licence fee amount from the petitioner for the Excise years 2002-2003 and 2003-04 for the IL-24 Licence of the petitioner in Thallapally Village, Mancherial Mandal, Adilabad District and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.14488 OF 2004 Between: M/s. Rama Wines, rep. by Licencee, Sri B. Prabhakar Reddy, S/o. Narasimha Reddy Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P., Revenue (ExciseII) Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. rep. by its Prl. Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Proh & Excise, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to Issue an order or writ one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice in Cr.No.E6/4850/3005-5, Dt. 05.07.2004 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the Rule made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P.NO.14490 OF 2004 Between: M/s. Sri Durga Wines, Rep. by Licencee Sri B. Prabhakar, S/o. Ramdas, R/o. Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II ) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or writ one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice in Cr.No.E6/850/2004-7, dt. 05-07-2004 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the Rule made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO. : 14493 of 2004 Between: M/s Aruna Wines, rep by Licencee Sri K. Venkatesh, S/o. Pentaiah, R/o. Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat Hyderabad, rep by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or writ one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice in Cr.No.E6/4850/2004-8 Dt.5.7.2004 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the rule made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO.: 14494 of 2004 Between: M/s.Apna Wines, rep., by Licencee, Sri D.Narasimha Reddy, s/o Malla Reddy, r/o Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, rep., by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or writ one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice in Cr.No.E6/4850/2004-6, dt.05-07-2004 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the Rule made thereunder. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO.: 14542 of 2004 Between: M/s. Sri Jaya Durga Wines, rep by Sri K. Srisailam, W/o Swamy R/o Ranga Reddy District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, rep by Principal Secrtary 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or Writ one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice in Cr. No. E6/4850/2004-3, dt 05-07-2004 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the Rule made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO.: 15123 of 2004 Between: M/s. Raghavendra Wines, Rep. by Licencee, Sri. T. Bikshapathi, S/o. Yellaiah, aged about 51 Years, R/o. Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Principal Secretary. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or writ one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the notice in Cr.No.E6/4850/2004-1, dt. 05-07-2004 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and the Rule made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO.: 5886 of 2004 Between: E.Ravi Krishna S/o Srimannarayana Angluru Village Krishna Dist Licence of SRD Wines, Penamaluru ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner , Prohibition and Excise Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The Proh.and Excise Superintendent Machilipatnam, Krishna Dist .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not renewing the liecence of the petitioner for the excise year 2004-05 by treating the licenced premises of the petitioner is located within a distance of 5 Kms. periphery limits of Municipal corporation Vijayawada as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to renew the Form IL-24 Licence of the petitioner by Collecting appropriate licence fee as applicable to the shops situated by beyond 5 Kms . periphery limits from Municipal Corporation Vijayawada. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO.: 5888 of 2004 Between: V.Prasada Rao, S/o Pothu Raju, R/o Penamaluru Village, Krishna District, Licencee of Sri Rama Durga Wines, Penamaluru. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Proh.and Excise Superintendent, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not renewing the licence of the Petitioner for the excise year 2004-05 by treating the licenced premises of the petitioner is located within a distance of 5 Kms. periphery limits of Municipal Corporation Vijayawada as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to renew the Form IL-24 Licence of the petitioner by Collecting appropriate licence fee as applicable to the shops situated beyond 5 Kms. periphery limits from Municipal Corporation, Vijayawada. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE W.P. NO.: 5889 of 2004 Between: N.Mohan Rao, S/o.Ranga Rao, R/o.Penamaluru Village, Krishna Dist. Lincencee of TRK Wines. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner,Prohibition and Excise, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Proh.and Excise Superintendent Machilipatnam, Krishna Dist. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not renewing the licence of the petitioner for the excise year 2004-05 by treating the