THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 12949 OF 2010 Dated 9th June, 2010 Between: N.Subba Reddy …Petitioner And The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri K.Gopal Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Prohibition and Excise The Court made the following ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner assailed order, dated 27.04.2010 passed by respondent No.2 whereby he levied and demanded the sum of Rs.1,85,200/- for the years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 towards additional licence fee in respect of the petitioner’s bar and restaurant. At the hearing, while the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise sought to justify this demand by placing reliance on Rule 10(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules, 2005, she fairly conceded that the impugned demand is not preceded by a show cause notice and opportunity to the petitioner to explain against the proposed levy. The law is well settled that any action, which results in adverse civil consequences, shall be preceded by an opportunity to the person, who is likely to suffer such adverse consequences. In this instant case, admittedly, no prior notice has been given to the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. The writ petition is therefore allowed without going into the merits of the sustainability of levy. Respondent No.2 is given liberty to initiate fresh action and pass an appropriate order after calling for explanation from the petitioner against the proposed levy. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 9th June, 2010 Note: Issue C.C in one week. vrn