IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 1381 of 2003 BETWEEN: A. Venkatesh Goud, S/o. Muthaiah, Shop No. 24-142/3, Lothukunta, Malkajigiri Mandal, R.R. District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Ranga Reddy District, at Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 Prohibition & Excise Inspector, S.H.O., Malkajigiri, R.R. District. 4 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Honourable Minister for Prohibition & Excise, Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction declaring, (i) Rule-24 of A.P. Excise Arrack and Toddy License General Conditions) Rules, 1969 as illegal, Unconstitutional for being capricious and vague and meaningless and as such violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. And (ii) the action of the First Respondent herein in suspending the license of the Petitioner, as illegal arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and also in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. And (iii) It is further prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to declare the proceedings in Cr.No.E6/12706/02-03 Dated 6-11-2002 of the 1st Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the Constitution of India in the Interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.GOVIND REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following: ORDER: None appears for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is the licensees of the toddy shop TFT Lothukunta of Malkajgiri Mandal for the excise year 2002 - 2007 i.e. 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2007. His licence has been suspended by the licensing authority/Prohibition and Excise Superintendent by the impugned order dated 16.11.2002. Questioning the said suspension pending enquiry, petitioner filed this writ petition and obtained interim order of status quo. 3. Counter has been filed stating that insofar as the question of challenging Rule 24 of the Andhra Pradesh (Arrack and Toddy Licences General Conditions) Rules, 1969 as illegal and unconstitutional is concerned, it is stated that the said Rules have been repealed and new comprehensive rules have been framed in the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence to sell toddy, conditions of licence and tapping of Excise Trees) Rules, 2007 vide G.O.Ms.No.1228 Revenue (Ex-II) dated 19.09.2007. As per the orders of the Government issued in G.O.Ms.No.1229 dated 19.09.2007 the existing Rules relating to toddy including the Andhra Pradesh Excise (Arrack and Toddy Licences General Conditions) Rules 1969 and the Andhra Pradesh Excise (tapping of trees and toddy shop special conditions of licences) Rules, 1969 will be seized to be in force with effect from 01.10.2007 and that the licences issued to the Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society’s and Tree for Tappers Scheme under the aforesaid rules pursuant to the new policy guidelines issued from time to time shall seize to be in force with effect from 01.10.2007. Therefore, under the new Rules 2007 the petitioner had not made any application and in fact, some other applicants made applications and licenses have been granted to eligible tappers and the petitioner has no grievance and he has not questioned the licences granted in favour of eligible persons. 4. In view of aforesaid counter and in view of the fact that the licence of the petitioner has expired on 31.03.2007, I am of the opinion that nothing survives in this writ petition for adjudication. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 23, 2008 DSK