IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 18387 of 2004 Between: M.Ganesh Rao, s/o Ammanna, r/o Mandapeta, East Godavari district Licencee of M/s.Supriya Bar and Restaurant ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Excise) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad rep., by its Secretary 2 Commissioner for Prohibition and Excise, Nampally, Hyderabad. .....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 to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in levying of compounding fee of Rs.1,00,000/- instead maximum levy of compounding fee of Rs.10,000/- fixed under Section 47 of the A.P.Excise Act and the consequential orders of the 2nd respondent in Cr.No.18828/2002/CPE/G3 dated 13-3-2003 as illegal and arbitrary and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.JAGANNATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner questions the order dated 13.03.2003 passed by the second respondent in Crime No.18828/2002/CPE/G3 in compounding the offence against him for diluting the liquor with water on payment of Rs.1,00,000/- contending that the actual compounding fee that is required under Section 47 of the A.P. Excise Act is only Rs.10,000/- till 2005, but by amending the Act 10 of 2005, the amount of Rs.10,000/- has been substituted with words as Rs.1,00,000/-. It is stated that the compounding of the offence in the instant case is prior to coming into force of the Act 10 of 2005. Admittedly, the order of the second respondent compounding the offence is dated 13.03.2003. It is stated that this Court in the similar facts and circumstances of the case, allowed the W.P.No.9642 of 2004 on 28.06.2004 in M/S. DURGA WINES, KAREEMABAD, WARANGAL v. THE COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, A.P. HYDERABAD holding that as per Section 47 of the A.P. Excise Act, the notional compounding fee can be only Rs.10,000/- and therefore, the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- imposed towards compounding fee is illegal and without jurisdiction. Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petition is allowed fixing the compounding fee of Rs.10,000/- for compounding the offence directing the respondents either to adjust the balance amount or refund the balance. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:31.03.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS}