IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12565 of 2009 Between: The Toddy Tapers Cooperative Society, Devanpally Group of Devanpally Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, represented by its newly elected President G.Anthaiah Goud S/o.Nagaiah Goud, R/o. Devanpally (V) Farooqnagar (M), Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Prohibition & Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Mahabubnagar. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents:AGP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is a toddy tappers cooperative society. As the society has come to adverse notice for indulging in adulteration, it’s license was cancelled by respondent No.2 on 27.12.2003. The petitioner has pleaded in this writ petition that after cancellation of license, the Managing Committee of the society, which indulged in adulteration, was superceded and a new body was elected. The petitioner is stated to have submitted representation, dated 25.03.2009 to the respondents to grant fresh license in favour of the society as envisaged under Rule 5(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License to Sell Toddy, Conditions of License and Tapping of Excise Trees) Rules, 2007 as notified in G.O.Ms.No.1228, dated 19.09.2007. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far, no order has been passed on the said representation. According to the petitioner, under the above-mentioned Rule, there is a bar on granting new licenses to the societies, which indulged in adulteration for a period of five years and that as the said five years period expired in 2008 itself, the petitioner is entitled to be granted a new license. Since the petitioner’s representation is pending, I refrain from giving a conclusive finding on the plea of the petitioner. In my considered view, interests of justice would be met, if respondent No.1 is directed to dispose of representation, dated 25.03.2009 said to have been sent by the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.1 to dispose of the said representation within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.16253 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 26th JUNE, 2009. kvni