IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15405 of 2010 Between: The Toddy Tapers Cooperative Society, Sangareddy, Medak District, rep. by its President, R. Narendra Chakravathi Goud ... PETITIONER a n d The Prohibition and Excise, Superintendent, Sangareddy, Medak district … RESPONDENT ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by the Toddy Tapers Cooperative Society, Sangareddy, Medak District, represented by its President, R. Narendra Chakravathi Goud assailing the show cause notice dated 17-06-2010. 2. The petitioner is a society comprising of toddy tapers. The Excise authorities inspected the depot as well as the shop No.5 maintained by the petitioner society and drawn samples of toddy. Sample of toddy was sent to the Regional Prohibition and Excise Laboratory and it was found to be adulterated. Thereupon, the respondent issued a suspension order suspending depot licence and also issued show cause notice proposing cancellation of depot licence. The petitioner society submitted explanation on 23-11- 2009 and sought for sending the second sample to an independent laboratory. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.25588 of 2009 seeking direction to the respondent to send the second sample to an independent laboratory. The said writ petition came to be disposed of on 25-11-2009 directing the respondent to send the second sample to an independent laboratory. Accordingly, the respondent referred the sample to the Chief Public Analyst, State Food Laboratory, Nacharam, Hyderabad. 3. On 10-12-2009 a show cause notice for cancellation of licence came to be issued by the respondent in respect of shop Nos.1 to 9. The petitioner society submitted explanation and made a request to differ the proceedings till the receipt of the report from the independent laboratory. The petitioner society filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Excise. An interim order came to be passed by this Court on 31-12-2009 directing the respondents not to take final decision till receipt of report from the independent laboratory in W.P.No.28920 of 2009. 4. Subsequently the writ petition came to be disposed of on 02-02-2010 making the interim order as absolute. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the appeal of petitioner society on 20-02- 2010. Thereupon, the petitioner society filed W.P.No.5792 of 2010. The said writ petition came to be allowed on 22-03-2010. The relevant portion of the order reads as hereunder: “At the hearing, it is admitted by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise that respondent No.2 has not received and considered the chemical analysis report on the second sample before canceling the licence. This action of respondent No.2 is contrary to order passed by this Court in W.P.No.28920 of 2009. In this view of the matter, the impugned order passed by respondent No.2 and the order of respondent No.1 confirming the said order of respondent No.2 are set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the chemical analysis report on the second sample, after calling for objections from the petitioner and after considering the explanation, if any, filed by the petitioner, pass an order afresh.” 5. Pursuant to the orders passed in the said writ petition, the respondent issued show cause notice after receipt of the report from the Chief Analyst, State Food Laboratory, Nacharam, Hyderabad. The said show cause notice is assailed in this writ petition. 6. When the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise takes notice on behalf of the respondent. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that show cause notice relates to depot and as well as the shops. According to him two independent show cause notices are required to be served on the petitioner and comprehensive show cause notice in respect of depot and shops is impermissible. 8. Since the notice challenged in the writ petition is purported to the show cause notice, I am not inclined to consider the submissions made by the petitioners and adjudicate the same on merits. It is open to the petitioner society to submit explanation to the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Sangareddy and invite orders thereon. 9. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J July 02, 2010. PN THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15405 of 2010 July 02, 2010