IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 9442 of 2004 BETWEEN: 1 Tatakamalla Harinath, S/o Chandraiah, M/s. Padmavathi Trading Company, H.No.3-2-20, Nehru Gunj, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 2 Bhupathi Venkata Ramana, S/o B. Pandu, M/s. Santosh Matha Kiranam and General Merchant, Nehru Gunj, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 3 Pandhiri Praveen, S/o Mallaiah, Kirana Merchant, Nehru Gunj, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 2 Dy. Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 3 The Circle Inspector of Police, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 4 The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S., Nalgonda Rural, Nalgonda District. 5 The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.S., Nalgonda Town, Nalgonda District. 6 The Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 7 The Circle Inspector of Prohibition and Excise, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 8 The Sub Inspector of Prohibition and Excise, Excise Station, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. ...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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents and their sub- ordinates in interfering with day to day business of the petitioners in Black Jaggery and Alum in spite of showing that the Black Jaggery and Alum offered to sell by them is purchased under Bills and transported to their business premises under way bills as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, further direct the respondents to implement the instructions/directions contained in circular order dated 12-04-2002 issued in Cr.No.4294/DPE/2001/C5 issued by the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioners seek a Writ of Mandamus to declare that the respondents are not entitled to interfere with their day-to-day business in the purchase and sale of Black Jaggery and Alum unless there is a reasonable belief to suspect that the petitioners are selling the black jaggery and alum for the purpose of manufacturing ID liquor. 2. Counter has been filed on behalf of the respondents 6 to 8 stating that they are not interfering with the day-to-day business of the petitioners in selling and purchasing of black jaggery and alum. However, as and when there is reasonable belief that the said black jaggery is sold for the purpose of manufacturing ID liquor only, action is being taken in accordance with law. 3. The fifth respondent/Sub-Inspector of Police also filed a counter stating that several cases have been registered against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 3 (e) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, as they are purchasing and selling black jaggery and alum without maintaining proper records and they are selling the same for the purpose of manufacture of ID liquor. 4. In view of the aforesaid counters, as there is denial of interference in the day-to-day business of the petitioners and as the cases have been registered only on the reasonable apprehension that they are selling and purchasing black jaggery and alum for the purpose of manufacturing ID liquor and in view of instructions issued by the Commissioner in the circular dated 12.04.2002, I am of the opinion that no specific direction requires to be passed in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 30, 2008 DSK