THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.26835 of 2005 17th September 2009 Between: Gattu Ramesh, S/o. Odelu, 32 years, Occ.Business, R/o. Mulugupally Village, Warangal District. …PETITIONER AND The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Warangal, Warangal District. …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.26835 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioner seeks a Writ of mandamus directing the respondent herein to refund an amount of Rs.96,174/- out of Rs.4,50,000/-, which was collected towards license fee for the period from 19.06.2002 to 31.03.2003 for running a Wine Shop at Bhupalpally Village, Warangal District. Pursuant to the notification issued by the respondent in the month of May 2002, the petitioner has applied for grant of license in Form No.IL-24 to establish a retail wine shop at Bhupalpally Village and Town. He was granted license by the respondent for the period commencing from 09.06.2002 to 31.03.2003. The petitioner has entered into a counter part agreement and also deposited the total license fee of Rs.4,50,000/-. Subsequently, the license of the petitioner was also renewed for the excise years 2003-04 commencing from 01.04.2003 to 31.03.2004. In this Writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that as much as the license of the petitioner was granted after expiry of 78 days from the date of commencement of the excise year i.e. 01.04.2002, the respondent ought not to have collected the entire license fee. Though no counter affidavit is filed, such question is no more a res integra in view of the judgment of this Court in Sri Narsimha Wines v. Pro. And Excise Supdt.[1]. In the said judgment, while considering the scope of Rule 25 (9) of the A.P. Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970, framed under G.O.Ms.No.190 Revenue {Ex.111} Department dated 24.03.1998, the Full Bench of this Court has held that the grant of license is a matter of contract between the Government and party and the petitioner being fully aware of the conditions notified for payment of license fee, cannot go back and seek directions for refund of license fee. As much as the question, which arises for consideration, is squarely covered by the judgment referred to above and for the reasons recorded in the judgment, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) 17th September 2009 RRB [1] 2001 (6) ALT 240 (F.B.)