IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO :20507 of 2009 Between: 1. E. Venkataiah Goud and another ..... PETITIONER AND The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Rajendranagar, Rangareddy District, V Floor, Excise Bhavan, J.N. Road, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO :20507 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners are the existing TFT licence holders of Pargi Village and the said licences are valid for a period of five years commencing from 1.10.2007. As per the instructions issued by the Excise Officials, the State Task Force inspected all over the State and though the petitioners’ shops were not inspected, the Excise Officials registered a case against the petitioners’ toddy shops as if the Task Force has inspected the toddy shops of the petitioners and drew three sample bottles. The said case was registered as Crime No.326 of 2009-2010 on 21.8.2009 under Rule 27 of A.P. Excise (Grant of Licences to Sell Toddy, Conditions of Licenses and Tapping of Rules) 2007. Apprehending action pursuant to the registration of the said crime, the petitioners approached the authorities and gave a representation on 19.9.2009 requesting the authorities to afford an opportunity of personal hearing before initiating any disciplinary proceedings. But however, as nothing transpired, the petitioners approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader. The only apprehension is that on the ground that a case in Crime No.326/2009-2010 was registered against the petitioners, licences may be suspended or cancelled. That is the reason why they are seeking for an opportunity of personal hearing. No doubt, when any disciplinary action is initiated, the petitioners, as a matter of right, are entitled to have an opportunity of personal hearing. But however, that doesn’t mean that the petitioners are also entitled for an opportunity of personal hearing or a notice, in the event of taking an interim measure. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the said representation and pass appropriate orders by affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners. However, this order does not preclude the authorities to act strictly in accordance with law, with regard to the interim measure. No order as to costs. _______________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada Date:23rd September, 2009 Note: Issue C.C. today (BO) Nn. HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO :20507 of 2009 23rd September, 2009