THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23673 of 2007 Date: 04.03.2008 Between: M/s.Varun Enterprises … Petitioner AND The Prohibition & Excise Superintendent, Karimnagar. And others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Palle Nageswara Rao Counsel for respondents 1 to 3: G.P. for Prohibition & Excise Counsel for respondent No.4: A.G.P. for Home HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23673 of 2007 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in harassing the petitioner by interfering with his business in black jaggery and alum being carried on under licence No.KRM/03/0/1273 and also in seizing the black jaggery and alum as illegal. Heard Sri P.Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise. In his affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner averred that under the licence granted by the respondents, he has been carrying on the business in black jaggery and alum in the name and style of M/s.Varun Enterprises, D.No.3-3-183, Koti Complex, Peddapalli, Karimnagar district, that he obtained certificate of registration issued by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Peddapally Circle, that he is purchasing black jaggery and alum under proper bills from traders of places like Chittoor, Anakapalli, Nizamabad and Medak district and selling the same to various customers under valid bills and maintaining books of accounts. He further stated that this Court vide order dated 13.8.2007 passed in W.P.No.18378 of 2007 directed the Excise Department not to interfere with the purchase and sale of black jaggery and alum if the transactions are evidenced by proper bills and the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise in his proceedings dated 22.12.2001 clarified to the law enforcing authorities not to harass the people doing business in black jaggery if the same is transacted under proper weigh bills and permits issued by the market committees. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the judgment of this Court and the circular issued by the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, the respondents have been harassing the petitioner by making joint visits and interfering with the business activities of the petitioner. Respondent No.3 in para-3 of his counter affidavit stated as under: “ In reply to para-4 that it is true that black jaggery is an agricultural produce. It is further submitted that the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise has clarified with regard to the dealing of Black Jaggery and Alum and the same is followed by these respondents in true spirit. However, there is no prior inspection of the petitioner’s shop and this respondent is not interfering with the petitioner’s business in jaggery and the allegation made in para-3 that the respondents are interfering with the day to day business of the petitioner is hereby denied and the petitioner is put to strict proof of the same. I submit that against the petitioner no crime is registered as on today and as such the relief sought in the writ petition is premature.” In para-4 he denied conducting frequent raids on the petitioner’s business and seizing his vehicles transporting black jaggery. He however stated that as held by this Court in the judgment reported in Ganesh Traders, Dharmapuri, Karimnagar district Vs. District Collector, Karimnagar[1], the Excise authorities can seize the black jaggery and alum if the same is used as raw material for manufacturing of illicitly distilled liquor. Except making allegations that the respondents are frequently interfering with the petitioner’s business, the petitioner failed to give any instance in respect thereof nor did he file any material in support of the said allegations. However, in view of the categorical denial of the said allegations by the respondents in the counter affidavit, which is not further controverted by the petitioner, this court need not go into the allegations made by the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore disposed of on the basis of the averments contained in the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3. Liberty is given to the petitioner to move this Court if and when there is any harassment meted out by the respondents. This order however, does not preclude the respondents from taking action in case they find that the petitioner indulged in misuse of black jaggery and alum for the purpose of manufacture of illicitly distilled liquor. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.30829 of 2007 filed by the petitioner seeking interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:04.03.2008 mdaa [1] 2002 (1) ALD 210