IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 1970 of 2001 Between: E.Yadav Reddy S/o.Kondal Reddy H.No.1-7-5/1, Habsiguda, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND The Proh. & Excise Superintendent Rangareddy District at Narayanaguda, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT 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 issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing impugned notice vide Cr.No.B1/137/2001, Dt.8/1/2001 declining to renew the licence under the name and style of M/s Venkateswara Wines at premises No.11- 89/10, Ramanthapur, RR.District for the excise year 2000-2001 even after collecting the licence fee of Rs.3,60,000/- and even after complying with all the formalities by the petitioner to grant such licence, as illegal, unlawful and contrary to law and consequently, direct the respondent to forthwith renew the above licence for the excise year 2000-2001 as per the orders issued by the government vide GO.Rt.No.78, Revenue (Excise-III) Department, Dt.8/1/2001 without referring to the amended rule 29(dd)(II) of Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules 1970 as amended by the GO.Rt.No.197, Dt.10/04/2000 as the said amendment is not applicable to the case of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner represented that the Writ Petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. _________ 03-11-2004 To 1. The Proh. & Excise Superintendent Rangareddy District at Narayanaguda, Hyderabad 3. Two Copies to the Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise, High Court Building, Hyderabad. (OUT) 4. Two C.D. copies. sj