THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.28003 of 2009 DATE:22.12.2009 Between: Deccan Wine House Amrith Bar & Restaurant, represented by its Manager, Puthlibowli, Hyderabad. ... Petitioner and The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, and others ... Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.28003 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of 1st respondent in not passing orders on its application dated 08.10.2009 and in not permitting it to conduct live band/orchestra with male and female singers in the restaurant hours, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that it is running a Bar and Restaurant in the name and style of "Deccan Wine House Amrith Bar & Restaurant" at Puthlibowli, Hyderabad, and it has a valid licence No.87/2004 dated 03.07.2004 issued by the 1st respondent and the same was renewed up to 30.12.2006. Subsequently, it has applied for renewal of the licence for the year 2007 at the office of the 2nd respondent having paid the requisite fee, but its licence was not renewed for further period. Thereafter, the 1st respondent, on the ground that it failed to apply for renewal of licence for the years 2008 and 2009, issued a notice No.L&O/A2/1051/2002-09, dated 23.09.2009, calling upon it to show cause, as to why its licence should not be cancelled and submit explanation, for which, it has submitted an application on 08.10.2009 narrating all the facts and seeking to drop further action on the show cause notice and renew its licence for further period beyond 31.12.2006. But however, no orders have been passed on its application by the 1st respondent till date. More over, the respondents are insisting it to take an amusement licence, though the same is not required and it does not come under the "place of public amusement" and threatening to book a case under Section 294 of IPC, if the amusement licence is not obtained. The same is questioned in this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Home. 4. It is a fact that the licence of the petitioner expired on 31.12.2006 and thereafter the same is not renewed for further period. The main grievance of the petitioner is that though it has submitted an application to the 2nd respondent seeking renewal of its licence, he has not passed orders on its application so far. It is also its grievance that though it has submitted an application dated 08.10.2009 narrating all the facts, in response to the notice No.L&O/A2/1051/2002- 09, dated 23.09.2009, issued by the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent has not yet passed orders thereon. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 08.10.2009 and pass necessary orders thereon, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 22nd December, 2009 CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.28003 of 2009 (Disposed of) 22nd December, 2009 CBS