IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 13709 of 2008 Between: M/s. Indira Glycols Limited, Rep by its Authorised agent Sri Prakash Oza, S/o. Subhash, Chandra Oza, Bazpur Road, Kohinur, Kashipur Taluk, Udamsing Nagar District, State of Uttarakhand ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary, Excise Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 M/s. Trident Sugars Ltd. Rep by its Authorised Signatory, Zaheerabad, Medak District. .....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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of the first respondent in obstructing/attempting to regulate the transportation and movement of molasses from Andhra Pradesh to another State, is arbitrary and ultra vires the power of the first respondent under the AP Excise Act 1968 and consequently direct the first respondent not to obstruct/interfere with the transportation/movement of molasses from the Factory of the third respondent to the factory of the petitioner by Road/Rail, and grant Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Excise. The petitioner is aggrieved that the 1st respondent is obstructing/attempting to regulate the transportation and movement of molasses from Andhra Pradesh to another State without power, authority or jurisdiction under the provisions of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 (for short ‘the Act’) or any other law, for the time being in force. The petitioner claims an unhindered right and entitlement to transport molasses from the factory of the 3rd respondent-sugar factory by road or rail to a place outside the territory of Andhra Pradesh i.e. to the State of Uttarakhand. A similar grievance was urged in W.P.No.6392 of 2008 by another petitioner and this Court by an interim order dated 31.3.2008 had directed the 1st respondent not to interfere with the export of molasses as disclosed in that petitioner’s representation. A Division Bench of this Court by the judgment dated 8.5.2001 in W.A.No.2209 of 1998 and batch declared that there is no statutory provision in the Act dealing with molasses and therefore and in the absence of any such legislation enabling the regulation of the transport or movement of molasses, no State actor or authority is entitled to regulate, interfere or obstruct the free movement of molasses. The learned Government Pleader for Excise does not dispute the position that the judgment above referred to is the governing and operative law on the subject as on date nor is it contended on behalf of the first respondent that the State has taken any legislative measures to confer any authority on the 1st respondent to regulate the trade in molasses. The Government Pleader has obtained instructions from the 1st respondent in a letter dated 1.7.2008. It states that earlier pursuant to an interim direction in a Writ Petition, the 1st respondent was considering grant of permissions/NOCs for transport of molasses. But thereafter, in view of an interim direction dated 31.3.2008 granted in WPMP No.8349 of 2008 in W.P.No.6392 of 2008, the 1st respondent or his officials are not interfering in the transport of molasses to the destinations outside the State. In para (3) of this letter, the 1st respondent clearly and categorically states that neither the 1st respondent nor the State of Andhra Pradesh have issued any circular or memo directing the sugar factories in the State not to allow lifting of molasses from their factories. In the light of the position in law declared by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 2209 of 2008 and batch, in the absence of any legislation by the State conferring any power, authority or jurisdiction on the 1st respondent or any other authority to regulate the transport of molasses and in the light of the statement of the 1st respondent contained in the letter dated 1.7.2008 addressed to the learned Government Pleader for Excise, the petitioner need have no apprehension as to interdiction or interference by either the 1st or the 2nd respondent with the petitioner’s business of transportation of molasses outside the State of Andhra Pradesh. Recording the statement in the 1st respondent’s letter dated 1.7.2008, which has been summarized above, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 2.7.2008 Note: CC as soon as possible Bo cvm