IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 925 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 08/04/2009 in WP NO : 7335 OF 2009 on the file of the High Court.) Between: R. Anjaneyulu, S/o. Rangappa, Licensee of M/s. Gokul Restaturant & Bar Door No. 1-4-20, Penukonda Road, Hindupur, Anantapur District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Commissioner of Excise, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Commissioner for Prohibition and Excise, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Penukonda, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 925 of 2009 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ appeal is filed by the appellant against the order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No:7335 of 2009 on 08-04-2009. The appellant herein is the writ petitioner. He filed the writ petition seeking to declare the order of the 2nd Respondent passed in Rc.No.79/2009/C1 dated 30-03-2009 as Illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. The learned single having observed that the petitioner has alternative remedy of appeal before the appellate authority, disposed of the writ petition directing the petitoner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal before the appellate authority and seek appropirate relief withi a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that till such time, the respodnents are directed not to implement the proceedings dated 30- 03-2009. Having aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is prefered by the writ petitioner. Heard the learned counsel and perused the material available on record. It is the case of the petitioner that he was granted licence under Rule-11 of A.P.Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions ofLicense) Rules, 2005 on 16-10-2006 to run a bar and he has been running the same without contravening any of the conditions of the licence in question. While so, the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 26-3-2009 calling upon him to show cause as to why the licence should not be cancelled for violation of Rules and licence conditions, within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice and further, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 30-03-2009 demanding him to pay the additional enclosure fee of Rs.1.4 lakhs and Rs.1.61 lakhs for 2006- 07 and for 2007-08 respectively. Therefore, the action of the respondent is arbitrary and illegal and as such, the same is liable to be set aside. The main thurst of the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned single Judge has granted time to avail the remedy of appeal without four Weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order and it is also made clear that till such time, the respondents shall not implement the proceedings dated 30.3.2009. But, however, the authorities without waiting for the time stipulated in the show cause notice and without affording any opportunity to submit the explanation within the said stipulated time, have passed the order impugned in the writ petition and therefore, the said action is arbitrary and illegal. The material on record makes it clear that the 2nd respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 26-3-2009 calling upon him to show cause as to why the licence should not be cancelled, within a period of 15 days. At the sametime, it is peculiar to note that the order impugned in the writ petition, came to be passed on 30.3.2009. From this, it can be inferred that the order dated 30.3.2009 has been passed without waiting for the time stipulated in the show cause notice and as such, the action of the authorities, amounts to arbitrariness and illegality. In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation to hold that the order dated 30.3.2009 is liable to be set aside on that count. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed setting aside the order impugned. No costs. However, it is made clear that liberty is granted to the appellant to submit his explanatin to the concerned within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. __________________________ Justice T. MEENA KUMARI _________________________ Justice SANJAY KUMAR Dated 21st July, 2009. Dvs/Gurc. HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 925 of 2009 (Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) Dated 21st July, 2009.