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.26506 of 2001 Between: Sudagani Ramesh S/o. Rajaiah R/o. Koppula Village, Shyampet Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal District. 3 The Sub-Inspector of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Order of Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and declare the orders dated 26.5.2001 made in C.C.No. 769/2001/DPE/B2 passed by the respondent No.1 as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.1 to re-hear the appeal of the petitioner and dispose of the appeal on merits and to grant any other relief or reliefs as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.26506 of 2001 ORDER: Petitioner questions the order passed by the 1st respondent in proceedings CR.No.769/2001/DPE/B2, dated 26-05-2001, in rejecting his appeal as ‘time barred’. The 2nd respondent through order, dated 29-09-2000, ordered for confiscation of the Jeep bearing No.AP-04T-5185 belonging to the petitioner, as the said vehicle was found transporting huge quantity of I.D.liquor. The said confiscation proceeding has not been questioned in the writ petition, but the petitioner questioned the order of the 1st respondent in rejecting the appeal as ‘time barred’. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the confiscation proceeding of the 2nd respondent was served on the petitioner on 21-10-2000. Admittedly, the appeal has to be filed within sixty days but whereas the appeal has been filed before the 1st respondent on 12- 03-2001 with a delay of two and half months. It is further stated that a Division Bench judgment of this Court in W.A.No.2569 of 2005, dated 23-01-2006, held that the period prescribed under special law for filing an appeal without giving any power to condone the delay or making applicable the limitation act, the limitation act cannot be invoked for extension of the period of limitation prescribed under special law. Admittedly, the appeal has to be filed within the prescribed time of sixty days and as there is no power to condone the delay, I am of the opinion that the 1st respondent rightly rejected the appeal. Therefore, this court does not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to question the confiscation order, dated 29-09-2000, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 31-03-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MADHURI}