THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28473 of 2010 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for the respondents. Petitioner is a licensee under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Lease of Right of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules, 2005 (for short ‘the Rules’). The bid amount is payable in six instalments. Excise year commenced from 01.07.2010. As per the terms and conditions, he has given two bank guarantees at the time of grant of license. The second instalment amount was payable on or before 20.10.2010. But, on the ground that he has not paid that amount, his bank guarantee bearing No.25/10, dated 28.06.2010, was invoked and realised towards the second instalment amount of Rs.22,50,000/-. As much as one bank guarantee has already been invoked, the second respondent – Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Secunderabad, issued notice, dated 08.11.2010, in Cr.No.B4/904/2010/ESS, to the petitioner directing him to furnish another bank guarantee for the aforesaid amount within a period of seven (7) days from the date of receipt of it, failing which, action would be initiated against him under Section 31(1)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 (for short ‘the Act’) and under Rule 20 of the Rules. It is the grievance of the petitioner that certain formalities, which are required to be completed before that bank, would take certain time, but however, the respondents without giving any further time, are attempting to take steps against him under Section 31(1)(a) of the Act and under Rule 20 of the Rules. As per the terms and conditions of grant of license, the petitioner has to give two bank guarantees. Though it was obligatory on the part of the petitioner that the second instalment was payable on or before 20.10.2010, he defaulted that instalment. In view of the same, the bank guarantee has already been encashed and to substitute the same, the second respondent issued the impugned notice. However, as the petitioner asserted that it would take some time to comply with the formalities in the bank for furnishing bank guarantee and taking into account that another bank guarantee is also in force, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to furnish the bank guarantee in terms of the notice, dated 08.11.2010, in Crime No.B4/904/2010/ESS, on or before 30.11.2010. Further, there shall be a direction to the respondents that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner under Section 31(1)(a) of the Act and under Rule 20 of the Rules, pursuant to the impugned notice. However, it is made clear that if the bank guarantee is not furnished by the petitioner on or before 30.11.2010, it is open for the respondents to take further steps in accordance with law. Subject to the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 16th NOVEMBER, 2010. kvni