IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 18778 of 2004 Between: Y. Suryanarayana, S/o. Veeranna, R/o. Degamarru, West Godavari District, Licensee of M/s. Damaya New Balaji Wines ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner for Prohibition and Excise Government of Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, West Godavari District at Eluru. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the order of the 1st respondent ;passed in Cr.No.11898/2003/CPE/G3 dated 25-9-2003 in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for refund of the licence fee for the period during which he could not conduct the business i.e. 1-4-2003 to 5-5-2003 as illegal arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and the consequently direct the respondents to refund the licence fee for the period during which the petitioner could not conduct the business i.e. from 1-4-2003 to 5-5-2003 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.JAGANNATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.18778 OF 2004 ORDER: The petitioner seeks to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in rejecting to grant refund of the proposed licence fee for the period from 1-4.2003 to 5-5-2003 in respect of the petitioner’s IL- 24 shop, situated at door No.22-1-43/14, Yadla Bazar. Palakol. The petitioner was the licency in respect of IL-24 shop, situated at door No.22-14-4/1, Yadla Bazar, Palakol, vide licence No.682/98-99 dated 30-9-1999 and was renewed in the same premises up to 31-3- 2003. It is stated that the owner of the said premises filed W.P.No.5032 of 2003 and obtained interim direction on 25-3-2003 not to renew the licence in favour of the petitioner at the said premises and therefore, the licence could not be renewed by the authorities for the year 2003-04. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application on 1-5-2003 requesting to permit him to shift the licenced premises from door No.22-14-4/1 to door No.22-1-43/14, Palakol and the said representation was considered by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent by order dated 1-5-2003 permitted for such shifting and accordingly licence was granted on 6-5-2003. Thus, it cannot be said that the department is at fault for the delayed issuance of licence or for non issuance of licence for the period from 1-4-2003 to 5-5-2003. It is the duty of the licencee to select a suitable premises by producing the rental agreement. At the instance of the owner of the said premises and pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, licence could not be granted and therefore, I am of the opinion that the department is not at all liable for the refund of the licence fee as the default is not attributable to the department. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate auction against the owner of the previous premises if he is entitled to do so in accordance with law. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Date: 21-07-2008. Shr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Commissioner for Prohibition and Excise Government of Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, West Godavari District at Eluru. 3.2CCs to 4.2CD copies