THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.19873 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings dated 06.05.2010 issued by the 2nd respondent- Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, Government of A.P., Hyderabad, whereunder the petitioner’s request for refund of proportionate license fee in a sum of Rs.7,94,224/- for the period from 12.08.2008 to 27.12.2008 during which the license was suspended, was rejected. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for the respondents submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Mandakini Restaurant and Bar v. Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Vijayawada[1]. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the case of the petitioner stands on a different footing to that of the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment of this Court. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise. The petitioner’s application for renewal of 2-B license was rejected, on the ground of non-production of lease deed executed by his landlady, and later it was renewed on production of such lease deed. As his request for refund of the proportionate license fee for the period for which the license was not renewed, was rejected, he filed the present writ petition. Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise submitted that the petitioner having failed to comply with the provisions of A.P. Excise (Grant of License) Rules, 2005, is not entitled to refund of proportionate license fee, as held by this Court in the judgment referred above, the same was disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and he contended that the case of the petitioner is different from that of the issue decided in the said judgment. So as to consider whether the issue raised by the petitioner is covered by the judgment referred to supra, I have perused the same. It is a case where the petitioner’s application for renewal of Form-2B license was rejected by the authorities on account of his failure to produce lease deed and a learned Judge of this Court, having dealt with the matter in detail, held that an applicant seeking renewal of Form-2B license shall necessarily comply with all the conditions envisaged in Rule 6 of A.P. Excise (Grant of License) Rules, 2005, and existence of lease deed being one of the conditions so stipulated by the said rule, failure of the petitioner therein to produce such a lease deed from the owner of the premises disentitles him to the renewal of Form-2B license and hence no illegality is said to be found in the order of the authority in rejecting the application of the petitioner therein for renewal. Since in the instant case also the petitioner failed to produce the lease deed for renewal of license and he having failed to comply with the conditions envisaged in Rule 6 of the Rules 2005, no fault can be found with the action of authorities in rejecting his request for refund of proportionate license fee for the period for which his license was suspended. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 20th October, 2010 IBL [1] 2008 (4) ALD 188